Pointers toward the Occurrence of C−F···F−C Interaction: Experimental Charge Density Analysis of 1-(4-Fluorophenyl)-3,6,6-trimethyl-2-phenyl-1,5,6,7-tetrahydro-4<i>H-</i>indol-4-one and 1-(4-Fluorophenyl)-6-methoxy-2-phenyl-1,2,3,4-tetrahydroisoquinoline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A charge density study of crystalline 1-(4-fluorophenyl)-3,6,6-trimethyl-2-phenyl-1,5,6,7-tetrahydro-4H-indol-4-one (A) and 1-(4-fluorophenyl)-6-methoxy-2-phenyl-1,2,3,4-tetrahydroisoquinoline (B) has been carried out using high-resolution X-ray diffraction data collected at 113(2) K. Weak intermolecular interactions of the type C-H...O, C-H...pi, and pi...pi hold the molecules together in the crystal lattice along with interactions of the type C-H...F and unusual C-F...F-C examined via charge density analysis. The topological features are evaluated in terms of Bader's theory of atoms in molecules through the first four criteria of Koch and Popelier. The C-F...F-C contact is observed to be across the center of symmetry in B and not in A, and further, this interaction appears to possess a certain correlation with the electron density properties at the critical point which suggests that such an interaction fits into the hierarchy of weak interactions.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".