MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071904643 · doi:10.1021/cs4000848

Organoboron Acids and Their Derivatives as Catalysts for Organic Synthesis

2013· article· en· W2071904643 on OpenAlexaff
Elena Dimitrijević, Mark S. Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Catalysis · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicOrganoboron and organosilicon chemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryRegioselectivityCatalysisBifunctionalOrganoboron compoundsOrganic chemistryReactivity (psychology)ElectrophileBoronic acidAldol reactionCombinatorial chemistryLewis acids and basesCycloaddition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An overview of the applications of boronic and borinic acids in catalysis is presented. Taking advantage of the Lewis acidity of trivalent boron and the reversible covalent interactions of organoboron acids with OH groups, diverse modes of catalytic reactivity have been achieved. Interactions with carbonyl compounds enable acceleration of addition and cycloaddition processes, whereas binding of their enol tautomers can lead to organoboron-catalyzed aldol and related reactions. Binding of organoboron acids to hydroxyl and carboxyl OH groups has been employed as a mode of electrophilic activation for catalysis of substitution, cycloaddition, rearrangement, and elimination reactions. By altering the nature of the interaction with the organoboron acid catalyst, activation of OH groups as pronucleophiles is also possible, resulting in catalyst-controlled methods for regioselective functionalization of diols and carbohydrate derivatives. Applications of organoboron acids in bifunctional and assisted catalysis are also discussed.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations185
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS CatalysisSame topicOrganoboron and organosilicon chemistryFrench-language works237,207