MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964038229 · doi:10.1139/v08-110

B-N as a C-C substitute in aromatic systems

2008· article· en· W1964038229 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M.J.D. Bosdet, Warren E. Piers

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicOrganoboron and organosilicon chemistry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryAromaticityRing (chemistry)BoronCarbon fibersTransition metalComputational chemistryGroup (periodic table)Organic chemistryStereochemistryMoleculeCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The substitution of isoelectronic B–N units for C–C units in aromatic hydrocarbons produces novel heterocycles with structural similarities to the all-carbon frameworks, but with fundamentally altered electronic properties and chemistry. Since the pioneering work of Dewar some 50 years ago, the relationship between B–N and C–C and the wealth of parent all-carbon aromatics has captured the imagination of organic, inorganic, materials, and computational chemists alike, particularly in recent years. New applications in biological chemistry, new materials, and novel ligands for transition-metal complexes have emerged from these studies. This review is aimed at surveying activity in the area in the past couple of decades. Its organization is based on ring size and type of the all-carbon or heterocyclic subunit that the B–N analog is derived from. Structural aspects pertaining to the retention of aromaticity are emphasized, along with delineation of significant differences in physical properties of the B–N compound as compared to the C–C parent.Key words: boron-nitrogen heterocycles, aromaticity, organic materials, main-group chemistry.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.187 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations593
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicOrganoboron and organosilicon chemistryFrench-language works237,207