Chiral Self-Selectivity in Two Model Dinitrobenzoyl-Derivatized Brush-Type Chiral Stationary Phases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A study of chiral self-discrimination in two model chiral stationary phases, N -(3,5-dinitrobenzoyl-phenylglycine and N -(3,5-dinitrobenzoyl)leucine, is described. “Brush-type” chiral interfaces are obtained by attaching these compounds onto oxidized Si(111) samples and atomic force microscopy tips by using two sample preparation procedures: a direct and a two-step surface deposition of the chiral stationary phase onto the substrate. By using AFM, the morphologies of the resulting chiral interfaces are obtained. XPS and FTIR provide information regarding the relative distribution of the compounds on the surface. We analyze the N 1s peaks using XPS to ensure that all the NH 2 groups on the surface are capped. Chemical force spectrometric measurements of the chiral self-selectivity in 2-propanol demonstrate that chiral discrimination is present in both systems, but larger forces are observed for N -(3,5-dinitrobenzoyl)phenylglycine, consistent with a previous molecular dynamics study that demonstrated much weaker solvent interactions with this species.
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".