MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168060136 · doi:10.1139/v10-099

Bisoxazoline–copper(I)-catalyzed aziridination of diazoacetate with imines — A DFT study

2010· article· en· W2168060136 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Qingxi Meng, Fen Wang, Ming Li

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSynthesis and Catalytic Reactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryCarbeneCyclopropanationImineCatalysisTransition stateEthyl diazoacetateCopperReactivity (psychology)AziridineMedicinal chemistryPhotochemistryOrganic chemistryRing (chemistry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Density functional theory (DFT) has been used to study bisoxazoline–copper(I)-catalyzed aziridination of diazoacetate with syn-imines or anti-imines. All the intermediates and transition states were optimized completely at the B3LYP/6-31G(d) level. Calculation results confirm that Cu(I)-catalyzed aziridination goes mainly through the catalyst–diazoacetate complex (M1), the copper(I)–carbene intermediate (M2), the copper–carbene–imine complex (M3), and the catalyst–aziridine carboxylate complex (M4). For syn-imines, the reaction mode I (C3–N5 bond attacking the Cu–C1 bond of M2) is more dominant than the reaction mode II (C3–N5 bond attacking the carbene–carbon C1 of M2), and the attack from the si-surface of M2 is prior to the re-surface. For anti-imines, the reaction modes and attacks from the si- or re-surface coexist. The reactivity of syn-imines is stronger than anti-imines. The favorable reaction channel is CA2 → M1b → TS1b → M2 → syn-TS2b → syn-M3b → syn-TS3b → syn-M4b → syn-P2. The dominant product theoretically predicted is of (S,S)-chirality. On the whole, the solvent effect decreases the free energies of the 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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicSynthesis and Catalytic ReactionsFrench-language works237,207