MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069462587 · doi:10.1021/jo901792t

Supramolecular Complexation and Enantiodifferentiating Photocyclodimerization of 2-Anthracenecarboxylic Acid with 4-Aminoprolinol Derivatives as Chiral Hydrogen-Bonding Templates

2009· article· en· W2069462587 on OpenAlexaff
Yuko Kawanami, Tamara C. S. Pace, Jun‐ichi Mizoguchi, Toshiharu Yanagi, Masaki Nishijima, Tadashi Mori, Takehiko Wada, Cornelia Bohne, Yoshihisa Inoue

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Organic Chemistry · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicFluorine in Organic Chemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTemplateSupramolecular chemistryHydrogen bondChemistryHydrogenStereochemistryCrystallographyCombinatorial chemistryMaterials scienceOrganic chemistryNanotechnologyMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The photochirogenesis of 2-anthracenecarboxylic acid (AC) complexed to a hydrogen-bonding template (TKS159) was investigated to obtain mechanistic information on how chirogenesis is achieved for the dimerization of AC. Complexation of AC to TKS159 leads to the shielding of one of the two surfaces of the prochiral AC molecule. The two diastereomeric AC-TKS complexes, i.e., re-AC-TKS and si-AC-TKS, were characterized by changes in the UV-vis, fluorescence, and circular dichroism spectra and excited-state lifetimes. The ee is not simply determined by the diastereomeric ratio of the re- and si-AC-TKS complexes but also depends on the relative lifetimes of the diastereomeric complexes. The relative population of the re and si complexes was calculated from the enantiomeric excess (ee) for the products, taking into account the relative lifetimes of the two complexes. These studies established a protocol that can be used to reveal the mechanism for photochirogenesis by investigating the ground state and the excited state behavior of supramolecular systems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations48
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Organic ChemistrySame topicFluorine in Organic ChemistryFrench-language works237,207