MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995482825 · doi:10.1039/b914497h

A novel liquid-phase strategy for organic synthesis using organic ions as soluble supports

2010· review· en· W1995482825 on OpenAlexaff
Congde Huo, Tak Hang Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Society Reviews · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques Innovation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhase (matter)IonLiquid phaseOrganic synthesisChemistryOrganic chemistryCatalysisPhysicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This critical review describes a new liquid-phase strategy for organic synthesis by using organic ions as soluble supports. Catalysts or reagents or substrates are immobilized onto organic ions. They are generally soluble in polar organic solvents (e.g. CH(3)CN) or ionic liquids but insoluble in non-polar solvents (e.g. ether or hexanes). Their reactions are carried out in homogeneous solution phase with a polar organic solvent or ionic liquid. After the reaction, the ion-supported species can be phase separated through precipitation from the polar organic solvent by the addition of a less polar organic solvent or extraction with organic solvents from ionic liquids. The ion-supported species can therefore be easily recovered and purified from the reaction mixture by simple washings with the less polar solvent. The ion-tagged species can function in the role of a catalyst, or as a reagent, or as the substrate in the synthesis of small molecules or bio-oligomers. Ion-supported catalysts and reagents can usually be recovered and reused with little diminution of activity. Important biooligomers such as peptides, oligosaccharides and oligonucleotides have been synthesized with this method (136 references).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations67
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical Society ReviewsSame topicInnovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques InnovationFrench-language works237,207