Toward Transition‐Metal‐Templated Construction of Arylated B\(_{4}\) Chains by Dihydroborane Dehydrocoupling

The reactivity of a diruthenium tetrahydride complex towards three selected dihydroboranes was investigated. The use of [DurBH\(_{2}\)] (Dur=2,3,5,6‐Me\(_{4}\)C\(_{6}\)H) and [(Me\(_{3}\)Si)\(_{2}\)NBH\(_{2}\)] led to the formation of bridging borylene complexes of the form [(Cp\(^{*}\)RuH)\(_{2}\)BR] (Cp\(^{*}\)=C\(_{5}\)Me\(_{5}\); 1 a: R=Dur; 1 b: R=N(SiMe\(_{3}\))\(_{2}\)) through oxidative addition of the B−H bonds with concomitant hydrogen liberation. Employing the more electron‐deficient dihydroborane [3,5‐(CF\(_{3}\))\(_{2}\)‐C\(_{6}\)H\(_{3}\)BH\(_{2}\)] led to the formation of an anionic complex bearing a tetraarylated chain of four boron atoms, namely Li(THF)\(_{4}\)[(Cp\(^{*}\)Ru)\(_{2}\)B\(_{4}\)H\(_{5}\)(3,5‐(CF\(_{3}\))\(_{2}\)C\(_{6}\)H\(_{3}\))\(_{4}\)] (4), through an unusual, incomplete threefold dehydrocoupling process. A comparative theoretical investigation of the bonding in a simplified model of 4 and the analogous complex nido‐[1,2(Cp\(^{*}\)Ru)\(_{2}\)(μ‐H)B\(_{4}\)H\(_{9}\)] (I) indicates that there appear to be no classical σ‐bonds between the boron atoms in complex I, whereas in the case of 4 the B\(_{4}\) chain better resembles a network of three B−B σ bonds, the central bond being significantly weaker than the other two