Correlation of rates of uncatalyzed and hydroxide-ion catalyzed ketene hydration. A mechanistic application and solvent isotope effects on the uncatalyzed reaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rates of hydration of a number of ketenes were measured in neutral and basic solution using flash photolytic techniques, and rate constants for their uncatalyzed, kuc, and hydroxide-ion catalyzed, kHO, reactions were determined. These results, plus additional data from the literature, were found to provide the remarkably good correlation log kuc = -3.21 + 1.14 log kHO, which spans 10 orders of magnitude in reactivity and includes 31 ketenes. This good correlation implies that uncatalyzed and hydroxide-ion catalyzed ketene hydraton occur by similar reaction mechanisms, which for the hydroxide-ion catalyzed process is known to involve nucleophilic attack on the carbonyl carbon atom of the ketene. Rate constants for phenylhydroxyketene, on the other hand, do not fit this correlation, which suggests that the mechanistic assignment upon which these rate constants are based may not be correct. Solvent isotope effects on these uncatalyzed ketene hydrations are weak; most are less than kH/kD = 2. It is argued that these isotope effects are largely, if not entirely, secondary in nature and that they are consistent with both a reaction mechanism in which nucleophlic attack of a single water molecule on the ketene carbonyl carbon atom produces a zwitterionic intermediate and also a mechanism that avoids this intermediate by passing through a cyclic transition state involving several water molecules.Key words: ketene hydration, rate correlation, nucleophilic attack, solvent isotope effects, phenylhydroxyketene.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".