Ab Initio Study of the (5<i>R</i>)- and (5<i>S</i>)-TT Pyrimidine h<sup>5</sup>(6−4) Pyrimidone Photoproducts. Implications on the Design of New Biologically Relevant Analogues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A computational study of a series of N(1)- and/or C(6)-alkyl-5,6-dihydrothymine diastereomers at theory levels up to MP4(SDTQ)/6-31G//HF/6-31G and MP2/6-311G//HF/6-31G has demonstrated the respective importance of the substituents at positions 1, 5, and 6 on the energetically favored conformation of each isomer. Results obtained both in the gas and condensed phase indicate that unsubstitution of the N(1)-position favors a half-chair conformation with the C(5) -and C(6)-substituents in the equatorial position. On the other hand, in the case of the (6S)-1,6-dimethyl-5,6-dihydrothymine, the C(6)-substituent adopts the axial position to minimize its van der Waals interactions with the N(1)-substituent. Furthermore, if the configuration at the C(5)-dihydrothymine position has no resultant influence on the total molecular free energy, when a pyrimidone substituent is introduced at the dihydrothymine C(6)-position, additional repulsive forces between the C(5)- and C(6)-substituents make the diaxially substituted half-chair conformation the most energetically favorable one. These results indicate that the observed C(6)-axially substituted conformation of the thymine-thymine pyrimidine h(5)(6-4) pyrimidone photoproducts is not necessarily induced by the macrocyclic structure. They also nicely explain the formation mechanism of these photoproduct derivatives, and allow the prediction of the conformation of new analogues.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".