MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000059476 · doi:10.1021/jp111148q

Practical Calculation of Molecular Acidity with the Aid of a Reference Molecule

2011· article· en· W2000059476 on OpenAlexaff
Steven K. Burger, Shubin Liu, Paul W. Ayers

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry A · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicFree Radicals and Antioxidants
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryMultilinear mapMoleculeMean squared errorComputational chemistryOrganic chemistryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A set of linear free energy models are presented for determining the pK(a) values of amines, alcohols, and carboxylic acids. Models are determined from a series of pK(a) predictors, taken both from traditional natural atomic orbital analysis (NAO) and from a novel approach introduced here of using a reference molecule: an ammonium ion for amines and a hydrogen sulfide molecule for alcohols and carboxylic acids. Using these reference molecules, we calculate the barrier to proton transfer and show that a number of properties associated with the transition state are correlated with the pK(a). By considering 38 predictors, we obtain a four-variable model for amines and a three-variable model for oxygen-containing compounds. The model for amines is based on 145 compounds and has a root mean squared error (RMSE) of 0.45 and R(2) = 0.98. The oxygen set has 48 molecules: RMSE = 0.26, and R(2) = 0.993. Similar, linear, and multilinear models are constructed after separating the sets into chemically similar categories: alcohols, carboxylic acids, and primary, secondary, tertiary, and aromatic amines. This separation gives simpler models with relatively low RMSE values, where the most important predictor of the pK(a) is the difference in energy between transferring the proton from the reference molecular base to the conjugate acid from the data set.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.219

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.239 · 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.

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

Citations38
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry ASame topicFree Radicals and AntioxidantsFrench-language works237,207