MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046220011 · doi:10.1021/cg050242g

Polymorphic Behavior and Crystal Habit of an Anti-Viral/HIV Drug:  Stavudine

2005· article· en· W2046220011 on OpenAlexaff
Mahmoud Mirmehrabi, Sohrab Rohani, K. S. K. MURTHY, Bruno Radatus

Bibliographic record

VenueCrystal Growth & Design · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCrystallization and Solubility Studies
Canadian institutionsApotex Pharmachem (Canada)Western University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStavudinePolymorphism (computer science)Crystal habitSupersaturationHydrateImpurityThymineCrystallographyChemistrySolventCrystal (programming language)Crystal structureHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)CrystallizationOrganic chemistryBiologyBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Different characterization methods (optical microscopy, Karl Ficher titration (KF), XRPD, and solid-state FTIR) were used to identify the two polymorphs and one hydrate of stavudine. The two forms are monotropically related, and form 1 is the stable polymorph. The effects of solvent, impurities, supersaturation, and mixing on the polymorphic occurrence of stavudine are investigated in detail. Hydrogen bonding analysis is employed to qualitatively predict the role of the solvent and structurally related impurities (thymine and thymidine) on polymorphism and crystal habit of stavudine crystals. The impurities showed significant changes in the crystal habit and crystal bulk density of stavudine but had no influence on the polymorphic structure. Depending on the degree of supersaturation at T = 25 °C, a specific polymorph or a mixture of forms 1 and 2 was obtained concomitantly.

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 score0.003

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations34
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrystal Growth & DesignSame topicCrystallization and Solubility StudiesFrench-language works237,207