Formation of a<sub>1</sub> Ions Directly from Oxazolone b<sub>2</sub> Ions: an Energy-Resolved and Computational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is well-known that oxazolone b2 ions fragment extensively by elimination of CO to form a2 ions, which often fragment further to form a1 ions. Less well-known is that some oxazolone b2 ions may fragment directly to form a1 ions. The present study uses energy-resolved collision-induced dissociation experiments to explore the occurrence of the direct b2→a1 fragmentation reaction. The experimental results show that the direct b2→a1 reaction is generally observed when Gly is the C-terminal residue of the oxazolone. When the C-terminal residue is more complex, it is able to provide increased stability of the a2 product in the b2→a2 fragmentation pathway. Our computational studies of the relative critical reaction energies for the b2→a2 reaction compared with those for the b2→a1 reaction provide support that the critical reaction energies are similar for the two pathways when the C-terminal residue of the oxazolone is Gly. By contrast, when the nitrogen of the oxazolone ring in the b2 ion does not bear a hydrogen, as in the Ala-Sar and Tyr-Sar (Sar = N-methylglycine) oxazolone b2 ions, a1 ions are not formed but rather neutral imine elimination from the N-terminus of the b2 ion becomes a dominant fragmentation reaction. The M06-2X/6-31+G(d,p) density functional theory calculations are in general agreement with the experimental data for both types of reaction. In contrast, the B3LYP/6-31+G(d,p) model systematically underestimates the barriers of these SN2-like b2→a1 reaction. The difference between the two methods of barrier calculation are highly significant (P < 0.001) for the b2→a1 reaction, but only marginally significant (P = 0.05) for the b2→a2 reaction. The computations provide further evidence of the limitations of the B3LYP functional when describing SN2-like reactions.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".