Chiral α-substituted allylboronates in a one-pot three-component asymmetric allylic alkylation/carbonyl allylation reaction sequence — Applications to the syntheses of (+)-(3 <i>R</i> ,5 <i>R</i> )-3-hydroxy-5-decanolide and (–)-massoialactone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of different organomagnesium reagents in the copper-catalyzed allylic alkylation of 3-chloropropenyl boronates with chiral phosphoramidite ligands produces the desired α-substituted allylic boronate reagents in high regioselectivity and with modest to high enantioselectivities (up to 96% ee). The size of the incoming alkyl substituent from the organomagnesium reagent was found to impact the yield and selectivity of the allylic alkylation. A one-pot procedure for the preparation of these chiral allylic boronates followed by a Lewis acid (BF 3 ) catalyzed addition to aldehydes delivers the desired allylboration products, homoallylic secondary alcohols, in good yields and very high diastereoselectivity. This three-component reaction methodology was applied to the syntheses of two lactone-containing natural products, (–)-massoialactone and (+)-(3R,5R)-3-hydroxy-5-decanolide. The key step of these syntheses involved the one-pot enantioselective copper-catalyzed allylic alkylation/allylboration reaction with a benzylic aldehyde, and afforded the desired product in 87% yield, 92% ee, and high E/Z selectivity in a ratio of 22:1. Remarkably, the allylic alkylation step of this sequential reaction was performed with a low catalyst loading of 2 mol% on a scale of >15 mmol that can provide multiple grams of the three-component product.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".