Oxoammonium‐ and Nitroxide‐Catalyzed Oxidations of Alcohols
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The discovery in 1959 of stable nitroxide‐based free radicals such as the prototypical 2,2,6,6‐tetramethylpiperidine‐1‐oxyl (TEMPO) led to their use as electron spin resonance (ESR) spin labels in chemistry, biomedicine, and materials science. These nitroxides are prepared by the oxidation of secondary amines that contain no hydrogen atoms on the alpha‐carbons. The unique redox properties of nitroxides enable their use as oxidants in organic synthesis. The varied preparation and uses of oxoammonium salts as stoichiometric oxidants for alcohols are one subject of this review. Oxoammonium ions as oxidants for alcohols have a number of advantages, for example, the method is heavy‐metal free and some of the reactions can be performed in water or aqueous mixtures. A few side reactions are associated with these oxidations. The most serious is the fast reaction of the oxoammonium ion with free amines The several ways these oxidation reactions can be carried out are discussed in detail. They are: Oxidations using stoichimetric quantities of preformed oxoammonium salts carried out in either acidic, neutral, or basic conditions; reactions in which stoichiometric quantities of oxoammonium salts are generated in situ by disproportionation of a nitroxide in the presence of a strong acid; nitroxide‐catalyzed oxidations using a secondary oxidant; efficient nitroxide‐catalyzed oxidations of primary alcohols to carboxylic acids; and oxidations of primary alcohols or hemiacetals that can lead to lactones.
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) | 0.001 | 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".