MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091328196 · doi:10.1139/v06-048

Component analysis of the X-C-Y anomeric effect (X = O, S; Y = F, OMe, NHMe) by DFT molecular orbital calculations and natural bond orbital analysis

2006· article· en· W2091328196 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Melissa L Trapp, Jonathan K. Watts, Noham Weinberg, Bernardine M. Pinto

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNatural bond orbitalChemistryConformational isomerismSteric effectsAnomeric effectAnomerMolecular orbitalCrystallographyComputational chemistryStereochemistryHOMO/LUMOMoleculeDensity functional theoryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Six 2-Y-substituted oxacyclohexane and thiacyclohexane heterocycles (Y = F, OMe, NHMe) were examined using DFT molecular orbital calculations. Natural bond orbital (NBO) analysis of the total energy behaviour yielded the orbital-interaction factors contributing to the conformational equilibria. The dipole moments of the optimized systems were used to estimate the electrostatic contributions to the anomeric effect. The primary determinant of the X-C-Y anomeric effect was found to be the orbital interaction components associated with the combined endo- and exo-anomeric effects acting in concert in the axial conformers. Electrostatic interactions made a contribution to the observed conformer stabilization in all cases, but did not account for the relative magnitudes of the energy differences among conformers of homologous molecules. In the case of the methylamino substituent, accentuated steric interactions in the axial conformer precluded stabilization by the exo-anomeric interaction and consequently, the net endo/exo anomeric stabilization did not dominate the conformational equilibria.Key words: anomeric effect, component analysis, natural bond orbital analysis, electrostatic, steric, and orbital interaction effects.

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 score0.284
Threshold uncertainty score0.567

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations24
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207