MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967537558 · doi:10.1080/10826070701224911

Prediction of the Lipophilicity of Some Plant Growth Stimulators by RP‐TLC and Relationship Between Slope and Intercept of TLC Equations

2007· article· en· W1967537558 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Simion Gocan, Simona Codruța Aurora Cobzac, Nelu Grinberg

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Liquid Chromatography & Related Technologies · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAnalytical Chemistry and Chromatography
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLipophilicityChemistryChromatographyPartition coefficientThin-layer chromatographyEthanolamineMaleic acidAnalytical Chemistry (journal)StereochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using RP‐TLC with RP‐18 F254s and a methanol‐water mixture as the mobile phase, several new compounds (some plant growth stimulators, such as amido esters of ethanolamine and maleic and succinic acid derivatives) were studied. The log P values were calculated using fragmental constant or ACD/Labs Software database (Toronto, Canada). A good correlation was obtained between log P vs. R M0 and C 0, respectively. These relationships can be used for prediction of the lipophilicity of similar compounds from the same structural group. The relationship between intercepts and slopes from TLC equations showed a very good correlation. The results obtained by RP‐TLC demonstrated a basic feature of lipophilicity; that both series of compounds are two “congeneric” series.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations6
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Liquid Chromatography & Related TechnologiesSame topicAnalytical Chemistry and ChromatographyFrench-language works237,207