Verifying the Predictability of 13C Chemical Shifts for a Series of Substituted-2-(4-Chlorophenyl)-3-Phenyl-1,3-Thiazolidin-4-Ones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previously, an “additivity” equation relating experimental 13C chemical shift data for two monosubstituted diphenyl-1,3-thiazolidin-4-one series was developed to predict chemical shifts for a similarly substituted bis-disubstituted thiazolidinone series. The sites of interest in the 1,3-thiazolidin-4-one are at the C-2, C-4, and C-5 carbons. The empirically derived equation for predicting the chemical shifts is dXY = dH + (dX-dH) + (dY-dH) where dXY is the predicted chemical shift for the disubstituted thiazolidinone: dH is the experimental chemical shift for the unsubstituted thiazolidinone, dX is the experimental chemical shift for substituent in the 2-phenyl ring, and dY is the experimental chemical shift for substituent in the N-(3)-phenyl ring. This article discusses the application of the aforementioned equation with respect to a new series of 2-(p-chlorophenyl)-phenyl-substituted-3-phenyl-1,3-thiazolidin-4-oneswith a comparison of both experimental and predicted 13C chemical shifts for the C-2, C4 and C-5 sites in the thaizolidinone ring. Utilization of the equation showed a level of chemical shift predictability with a degree of accuracy in concert with a previously reported series. The degree of predictability again showed a dependency on the particular substituent and the chemical shift for the site being predicted. This was ±0.06 ppm for C-2, ±0.2 ppm for C-4 and ±0.09 ppm for C5. Finally, there was a correlation between Hammett s values and the substituent chemical shifts using 13C values at C-2. The r value was -0.86 indicating that the C-2 carbon preferred a positive charge.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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".