Stereoselective Synthesis of Chiral Sulfilimines from<i>N</i>-Mesyloxycarbamates: Metal-Nitrenes versus Metal-Nitrenoids Species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The synthesis of a variety of chiral sulfilimines and sulfoximines is described. The amination of thioethers with a chiral N-mesyloxycarbamate was achieved in high yields and stereoselectivities using Rh2[(S)-nttl]4 as catalyst in the presence of 4-dimethylaminopyridine (DMAP) and a pyridinium salt, such as bis(DMAP)CH2Cl2 or a viologen salt. These additives proved instrumental to enhance both the yield and the stereochemical discrimination of the reaction. Mechanistic studies and control experiments have elucidated the role of these additives. DMAP served as an apical ligand for the rhodium catalyst: an X-ray crystal structure of the (DMAP)2·[Rh2{(S)-nttl}4] complex was obtained. This complex displayed a lower and irreversible redox potential. Control experiments with preformed Rh(II)-Rh(III) complex suggested such a catalytically active species in the thioether amination process. Diastereoselectivities were influenced by the sulfonyloxy leaving group, ruling out the possibility of a common metal nitrene species and instead suggesting a rhodium-nitrenoid complex. It is believed that the bispyridinium salt played the role of a phase transfer catalyst, influencing both the yield and the diastereoselectivity of the reaction.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".