Chiral Conducting Surfaces via Electrochemical Oxidation of<scp>l</scp>-Leucine-Oligothiophenes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polythiophenes bearing a specific chiral center such as L-leucine have been prepared via the electrochemical oxidation of a series of L-leucine functionalized oligothiophenes (monothiophenes and terthiophenes). These oligothiophenes have been prepared through the condensation of L-leucine methyl ester and the corresponding thiophene monomers in the presence of hydroxybenzotriazole (HOBt) and N,N'-dicyclohexylcarbodiimide (DCC) followed by hydrolysis of the esters. The electroactive polymers are electrochemically stable and exhibit excellent adhesive properties on electrode surfaces (platinum, gold, and glassy carbon) as well as interesting optical properties in both doped and undoped states. Hydrogen bonds between a free amino acid (L-leucine, D-leucine, L-alanine, D-alanine, and D/L-alanine) and the L-leucine based polythiophenes (chiral conducting surface) were probed using cyclic voltammetry. Preliminary results show that the capacitive current of a modified L-leucine-polythiophene electrode decreases as a result of the formation of a hydrogen bond barrier on the surface of the chiral conducting surface accompanied with a shift of the oxidation potential. Cyclic voltammetry responses resulting from the interaction of the chiral conducting surface with L and Dfree amino acid isomers are similar. The formation of hydrogen bonds between the chiral conducting surfaces and the free amino acids was characterized by (1)H NMR. A chemical shift was observed for the N-H group in monomer 6 as a result of the hydrogen bond formation between the L-leucine methyl ester (D-leucine methyl ester, D/L-leucine methyl ester) and monomer 6.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".