Reactivity of Poly(anilineboronic acid) with NAD<sup>+</sup> and NADH
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The complexation of poly(anilineboronic acid) with β-nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NADH) and its oxidized form, NAD +, has been investigated using electrochemical and spectroscopic techniques. At neutral pH, cyclic voltammetry of poly(anilineboronic acid) exhibits redox activity in the presence of NADH and NAD + characteristic of self-doping. While complexation of both NADH and NAD + with poly(anilineboronic acid) is confirmed with polarization-modulated infrared reflection absorption spectroscopic measurements, a significant difference in redox behavior is observed. 11 B NMR studies suggest that the nature of species responsible for self-doping is different in the case of NAD + and NADH, where the presence of NAD + complex appears to facilitate the formation of the pernigraniline form of the polymer. In addition, a distinct difference in the sensitivity of open-circuit potential measurements is observed upon complexation with NADH and NAD + as a function of the oxidation state of polymer suggesting that reduction of the polymer occurs upon complexation of NADH. The mechanism responsible for the observed behavior is supported by quartz crystal microbalance measurements.
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".