Reactions of phenyldimethylsilyllithium with β-<i>N</i>,<i>N</i>-dimethylaminoenones: A convenient synthesis of β-dimethyl(phenyl)silylacrylic acid and its derivatives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phenyldimethylsilyllithium reacted with 5,5-dimethyl-3-(N,N-dimethylamino)cyclohex-2-enone (7), 3-(E)-N,N-dimethylaminopropenal (11), and 4-N,N-dimethylaminobut-3-en-2-one (13) to give the corresponding β-silyl-α,β-unsaturated carbonyl compounds 8, 12, and 14, in which the dimethylamino group has been displaced by the phenyldimethylsilyl group. Phenyldimethylsilyllithium reacted with ethyl β-N,N-dimethylaminopropenoate (15) by conjugate addition, but, in contrast to the ketones 7 and 13 and the aldehyde 11, the intermediate enolate 16 was C-protonated in the aqueous work-up to give ethyl 3-N,N-dimethylamino-3-dimethyl(phenyl)silylpropanoate (17). When the enolate 16 was instead given a mysteriously brief treatment with methyl iodide before work-up, the product was ethyl 3-(E)-dimethy(phenyl)silylpropenoate (18). Phenyllithium and methyllithium also added conjugatively to ethyl β-N,N-dimethylaminoacrylate (15) but, in contrast to the silyl case, the intermediate enolate 22 reacted unexceptionally with methyl iodide to give the products 25 and 26 of stereoselective C-methylation. This synthesis of the ester 18 was used to synthesize the Oppolzer sultam derivative 30.Key words: conjugate addition, elimination, substitution, silyllithium, silylenone.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 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".