Gas chromatographic analysis of diels‐alder adducts of geometrical and positional isomers of conjugated linoleic acid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This research demonstrates the gas chromatographic analysis of the 4‐methyl‐1,2,4‐triazoline‐3,5‐dione (MTAD) adducts derived from standards of cis,trans ‐9,11‐octadecadienoic acid, trans,trans ‐9,11‐octadecadienoic acid, and cis,cis ‐9,11‐octadecadienoic acid. Methyl cis,trans ‐9,11‐octadecadienoate and methyl trans,trans ‐9,11‐octadecadienoate formed Diels‐Alder addition products with MTAD to produce adducts with similar mass spectral fragmentation patterns but different retention times determined by gas chromatography/ mass spectrometry. Methyl cis,cis ‐9,11‐octadecadienoate reacted slowly and produced two adducts with similar fragmentation patterns and different retention times. These results were comparable to those reported for an analogous series of conjugated hexadienes. Based on hexadiene reactions, methyl cis,trans ‐9,11‐octadecadienoate produced a trans adduct as a major product while methyl trans,trans ‐9,11‐octadecadienoate formed a cis adduct. Methyl cis,cis ‐9,11‐octadecadienoate reacted slowly under the conditions used leaving mostly unreacted material. Of the adducts observed from this isomer, a major trans adduct and a minor cis adduct were formed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".