Reactions of the Cumyloxyl and Benzyloxyl Radicals with Tertiary Amides. Hydrogen Abstraction Selectivity and the Role of Specific Substrate-Radical Hydrogen Bonding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A time-resolved kinetic study in acetonitrile and a theoretical investigation of hydrogen abstraction reactions from N,N-dimethylformamide (DMF) and N,N-dimethylacetamide (DMA) by the cumyloxyl (CumO(•)) and benzyloxyl (BnO(•)) radicals was carried out. CumO(•) reacts with both substrates by direct hydrogen abstraction. With DMF, abstraction occurs from the formyl and N-methyl C-H bonds, with the formyl being the preferred abstraction site, as indicated by the measured kH/kD ratios and by theory. With DMA, abstraction preferentially occurs from the N-methyl groups, whereas abstraction from the acetyl group represents a minor pathway, in line with the computed C-H BDEs and the kH/kD ratios. The reactions of BnO(•) with both substrates were best described by the rate-limiting formation of hydrogen-bonded prereaction complexes between the BnO(•) α-C-H and the amide oxygen, followed by intramolecular hydrogen abstraction. This mechanism is consistent with the very large increases in reactivity measured on going from CumO(•) to BnO(•) and with the observation of kH/kD ratios close to unity in the reactions of BnO(•). Our modeling supports the different mechanisms proposed for the reactions of CumO(•) and BnO(•) and the importance of specific substrate/radical hydrogen bond interactions, moreover providing information on the hydrogen abstraction selectivity.
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".