MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997557139 · doi:10.1021/jo062244t

An Experimental and Theoretical Study of the Asymmetric Lithiation of 1,2,3,5,6,7-Hexahydro-3a,4a-diazacyclopenta[<i>def</i>]phenanthren-4-one

2007· article· en· W1997557139 on OpenAlexaff
Costa Metallinos, Travis Dudding, Josh Zaifman, Jennifer L. Chaytor, Nicholas J. Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Organic Chemistry · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCoordination Chemistry and Organometallics
Canadian institutionsBrock UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistrySparteineElectrophileEnantiomerYield (engineering)Enantiomeric excessMedicinal chemistryArylUreaPiperidineNitrogenStereochemistryEnantioselective synthesisOrganic chemistryCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The inability of bis-N-Boc-protected octahydrophenanthroline to undergo asymmetric lithiation with (-)-sparteine is circumvented by use of a urea functionality as the directing group. Asymmetric lithiation followed by electrophile quench gives products substituted alpha to nitrogen in better yield (17-30%) but slightly lower enantiomeric ratio (er 84:16) than analogous lithiation of N-Boc-piperidine (er 87:13). Computational studies at the MP2/6-316(d)//B3LYP/6-316(d) level indicate that the prochiral equatorial S-hydrogen is removed preferentially over the pro-R hydrogen, with a difference in transition state activation energies of 1.26 kcal/mol, corresponding to a predicted er of 89:11. The predicted stereochemistry of the reaction was confirmed by single-crystal X-ray analysis of an aryl dibromide prepared from the enantiomerically enriched alpha-methyl-substituted product.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Organic ChemistrySame topicCoordination Chemistry and OrganometallicsFrench-language works237,207