Investigation of substituted-benzene dopants for charge exchange ionization of nonpolar compounds by atmospheric pressure photoionization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Atmospheric pressure photoionization (APPI) using a dopant enables both polar and nonpolar compounds to be analyzed by LC/MS. To date, the charge exchange ionization pathway utilized for nonpolar compounds has only been efficient under restrictive conditions, mainly because the usual charge exchange reagent ions--the dopant photoions themselves--tend to be consumed in proton transfer reactions with solvent and/or dopant neutrals. This research aims to elucidate the factors affecting the reactivities of substituted-benzene dopant ions; another, overriding, objective is to discover new dopants for better implementing charge exchange ionization in reversed-phase LC/MS applications. The desirable properties for a charge exchange dopant include low reactivity of its photoions with solvent and dopant neutrals and high ionization energy (IE). Reactivity tests were performed for diverse substituted-benzene compounds, with substituents ranging from strongly electron withdrawing (EW) to strongly electron donating (ED). The results indicate that both the tendency of a dopant's photoions to be lost through proton transfer reactions and its IE depend on the electron donating/withdrawing properties of its substituent(s): ED groups decrease reactivity and IE, while EW groups increase reactivity and IE. Exceptions to the reactivity trend for dopants with ED groups occur when the substituent is itself acidic. All told, the desirable properties for a charge exchange dopant tend towards mutual exclusivity. Of the singly-substituted benzenes tested, chloro- and bromobenzene provide the best compromise between low reactivity and high IE. Several fluoroanisoles, with counteracting EW and ED groups, may also provide improved performance relative to the established dopants.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
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".