MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2422364657 · doi:10.1021/acs.joc.5b02397

Computational Examination of (4 + 3) versus (3 + 2) Cycloaddition in the Interception of Nazarov Reactions of Allenyl Vinyl Ketones by Dienes

2015· article· en· W2422364657 on OpenAlexafffund
Zhe Li, Russell J. Boyd, D. Jean Burnell

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Organic Chemistry · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicOrganic Chemistry Cycloaddition Reactions
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAtlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
KeywordsCycloadditionDieneChemistryTransition stateLewis acids and basesComputational chemistryMedicinal chemistryPhotochemistryOrganic chemistryCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A computational examination of the tandem Nazarov/cycloaddition process involving an allenyl vinyl ketone with a diene has been carried out using the ωB97X-D/6-311++G(d,p)//ωB97X-D/6-31+G(d,p) method with solvation modeled by SMD-PCM. The barrier for the initial Lewis acid mediated Nazarov reaction, which provided the intermediate cyclic oxylallyl cation, was higher than that for any subsequent cycloaddition. The barrier for the first step of a subsequent stepwise reaction did not vary much with the diene, and the lowest barrier was with the diene in its s-trans conformation. Stepwise formation of a (4 + 3) cycloaddition product was not energetically feasible, but (3 + 2) cycloaddition products could have been produced through low energy pathways. The barrier for a concerted (4 + 3) cycloaddition did depend upon the diene, which was always in an s-cis geometry. The barriers for the compact and the extended geometries for the transition states of (4 + 3) cycloadditions were not much different.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Organic ChemistrySame topicOrganic Chemistry Cycloaddition ReactionsFrench-language works237,207