Stereoselective Synthesis of 2-<i>C</i>-Branched (Acetylmethyl) Oligosaccharides and Glycoconjugates: Lewis Acid-Catalyzed Glycosylation from 1,2-Cyclopropaneacetylated Sugars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1,2-Cyclopropaneacetylated sugars as glycosyl donors reacted with a series of glycosyl acceptors (monosaccharides, amino acids, and other alcohols) in the presence of Lewis acid to produce oligosaccharides and glycoconjugates containing 2-C-acetylmethylsugars. Galactosyl donor gave good to excellent α-selectivities with TMSOTf as a catalyst, whereas galactosyl donor offered moderate to good β-selectivities when BF(3)·Et(2)O was used as a catalyst. However, glucosyl donors produced β-exclusive selectivity under both conditions. The stereoselectivities of glycosylation depend on the reactivity of donor sugars and Lewis acid catalyst, which effectively dictated the glycosylation pathways. The evidence suggests that galactosyl donors (e.g., 7) can undergo S(N)1 pathway with a strong Lewis acid (TMSOTf) and S(N)2 pathway under BF(3)·Et(2)O, whereas the glucosyl donors (e.g., 8 and 10) followed S(N)2 pathway. The stereoselectivity was also consequential to the formation of a C2'-acetal intermediate formed via the 2-C-acetylmethyl group and the anomeric carbonium intermediate in glycosylation.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".