MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035344693 · doi:10.1139/v06-015

Synthesis of some new 1-aryl-4-formyl-3-(4-hydroxy-6-methyl-2-oxo-2<i>H</i>-pyran-3-yl)pyrazoles using the Vilsmeier–Haack reaction — Isolation of the key intermediate 1-aryl-3-(4-hydroxy-6-methyl-2-oxo-2<i>H</i>-pyran-3-yl)pyrazoles

2006· article· en· W2035344693 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ajay Kumar, Om Prakash, Mayank Kinger, Shiv P. Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSynthesis of heterocyclic compounds
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryDehydroacetic acidPyranMoietyReagentArylMedicinal chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arylhydrazones of dehydroacetic acid (DHA) underwent Vilsmeier–Haack reaction to generate the corresponding 1-aryl-4-formyl-3-(4-hydroxy-6-methyl-2-oxo-2H-pyran-3-yl)pyrazoles (1) with the pyrone moiety of the DHA remaining intact. However, when the reaction was performed using 1 equiv. of the reagent, compounds of 1-aryl-3-(4-hydroxy-6-methyl-2-oxo-2H-pyran-3-yl)pyrazoles (2a–2f) were obtained, which underwent smooth conversion to 1-aryl-4-formyl-3-(4-hydroxy-6-methyl-2-oxo-2H-pyran-3-yl)pyrazoles (1) on further treatment with another equivalent of the Vilsmeier–Haack reagent. This unreported observation suggests the intermediacy of 1-aryl-3-(4-hydroxy-6-methyl-2-oxo-2H-pyran-3-yl)pyrazoles (2) in Vilsmeier–Haack reactions of hydrazones with a pyrone moiety. Several analogous compounds were also prepared using arylhydrazones of DHA.Key words: dehydroacetic acid, pyrazoles, Vilsmeier–Haack reaction, 3-acetyl-4-hydroxy-6-methyl-2H-pyran-2-one.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 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

Citations17
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicSynthesis of heterocyclic compoundsFrench-language works237,207