MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007121906 · doi:10.1021/ja802646f

Cyclic 1,3-Dipoles or Acyclic Phosphonium Ylides? Electronic Characterization of “Montréalones”

2008· article· en· W2007121906 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth H. Krenske, K. N. Houk, Bruce A. Arndtsen, Daniel J. St‐Cyr

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Chemical Society · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCyclopropane Reaction Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryPhosphoniumYlideAb initioReagentCrystallographyEnthalpyDensity functional theoryCovalent bondStereochemistryComputational chemistryPhysical chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The structural features of a recently introduced class of 1,3-dipolar reagents have been computed by density functional theory and ab initio methods. The reagents are formally derived from Münchnones by replacement of the C O group with a PR3 unit. The parent species (PR3 = PH3) shows a long P...O interaction (2.55 A at the B3LYP/6-31+G(d) level), together with a nonplanar ring, and is best described as a weakly chelated acylamino-phosphonium ylide. The corresponding acyclic form, in which the P...O interaction is absent, is predicted to be 2-3 kcal mol-1 higher in enthalpy. Variation of the phosphorus substituents exerts a marked effect on the P...O distance, with electron-withdrawing groups favoring a covalent interaction [P...O 1.97 A for PR3 = PPh(catechyl)] and electron-donating groups favoring a weak interaction [P...O 3.92 A for PR3 = PPh3]. However, this variation has little effect on the relative energies of the cyclic and acyclic forms. The barriers for concerted cycloadditions with ethylene are 22.8 kcal mol-1 (PH3), 31.7 kcal mol-1 (PPh3), and 16.2 kcal mol-1 [PPh(catechyl) with axial O], which correspond with experimental observations and follow the same trend as the energies required to distort the dipole to the TS geometry.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.560

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations16
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Chemical SocietySame topicCyclopropane Reaction MechanismsFrench-language works237,207