MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998967504 · doi:10.1139/v01-122

Quinoxaline-1,2,3-dithiazolyls Synthesis, EPR characterization, and redox chemistry

2001· article· en· W1998967504 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
A. W. Cordes, James R. Mingie, Richard T. Oakley, Robert W. Reed, Hongzhou Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSynthesis and Biological Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryElectron paramagnetic resonanceMonoclinic crystal systemRadicalIodideOrthorhombic crystal systemOxidizing agentCrystallographyRedoxQuinoxalineIsonicotinamidePyrazineCrystal structureMedicinal chemistryStereochemistryInorganic chemistryMoleculeOrganic chemistryHydrogen bond

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oxidation of quinoxalineaminothiol with SCl2 or S2Cl2/Cl2 affords a series of compounds based on the quinoxaline-1,2,3-dithiazole framework QDTA. Under highly oxidizing conditions, the 1,2,3-dithiazolyl ring is opened to afford the acyclic dichlorosulfimino-sulfenyl chlorides Clx-QDTA-Cl3 (x = 0, 1, 2). Reduction of these "trichloro" compounds leads to ring closure. For x = 2, reduction using S2Cl2 affords the dithiazolylium chloride [Cl2-QDTA][Cl]. For all values of x, reduction with iodide ion (3 mol equiv) affords the corresponding dithiazolyl radical [Clx-QDTA]. The radicals can be isolated in good yield in crude form, but attempts to purify them by vacuum sublimation lead to thermal degradation. The radicals have nonetheless been fully characterized by EPR spectroscopy, and the assignments of the observed hyperfine coupling constants cross-matched with those obtained by computation at the B3LYP/6-31G** level. The structures of the trichloro compounds Clx-QDTA-Cl3 (x = 1, 2) have been confirmed by X-ray crystallography. Crystal data: Cl-QDTA-Cl3, monoclinic, space group C2/c, a = 30.561(5) Å, b = 4.9764(9) Å, c = 22.247(4) Å, β = 131.822(14)°, V = 2521.4(8) Å3, Z = 8, R(F) = 0.043, and Rw(F) [I [Formula: see text] σ (I)] = 0.049; Cl2-QDTA-Cl3, orthorhombic, space group Pnma, a = 18.627(12) Å, b = 6.848(4) Å, c = 10.926(7) Å, V = 1393.7(15) Å3, Z = 4, R(F) = 0.047, and Rw(F) [I [Formula: see text] 3σ(I)] = 0.060.Key words: thiazyl radicals, molecular conductors, EPR spectroscopy, quinoxaline, DFT calculations.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations23
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicSynthesis and Biological EvaluationFrench-language works237,207