MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001892637 · doi:10.1021/jo049327z

A New Interpretation of Chlorine Leaving Group Kinetic Isotope Effects; A Theoretical Approach

2004· article· en· W2001892637 on OpenAlexafffund
Agnieszka Dybała‐Defratyka, Michał Rostkowski, Olle Matsson, Kenneth Charles Westaway, Piotr Paneth

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Organic Chemistry · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicChemical Reaction Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryKinetic isotope effectChlorineSN2 reactionLeaving groupNucleophileTransition stateIsotopes of chlorineComputational chemistryIonPhysical chemistryMedicinal chemistryOrganic chemistryAtomic physicsDeuteriumCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The chlorine leaving group kinetic isotope effects (KIEs) for the S(N)2 reactions between methyl chloride and a wide range of anionic, neutral, and radical anion nucleophiles were calculated in the gas phase and, in several cases, using a continuum solvent model. In contrast to the expected linear dependence of the chlorine KIEs on the C(alpha)-Cl bond order in the transition state, the KIEs fell in a very small range (1.0056-1.0091), even though the C(alpha)-Cl transition state bond orders varied widely from approximately 0.32 to 0.78, a range from reactant-like to very product-like. This renders chlorine KIEs, and possibly other leaving-group KIEs, less useful for studies of reaction mechanisms than commonly assumed. A partial explanation for this unexpected relationship between the C(alpha)-Cl transition state bond order and the magnitude of the chlorine KIE is presented.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations26
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Organic ChemistrySame topicChemical Reaction MechanismsFrench-language works237,207