The crystal structure of trandolapril, C <sub>24</sub> H <sub>34</sub> N <sub>2</sub> O <sub>5</sub> : an example of the utility of raw data deposition in the powder diffraction file
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The crystal structure of trandolapril has been solved by parallel tempering using the FOX software package with laboratory powder diffraction data submitted to and published in the Powder Diffraction File. Rietveld refinement was performed with the software package GSAS yielding orthorhombic lattice parameters of a = 19.7685(4), b = 15.0697(4), and c = 7.6704(2) Å (C 24 H 34 N 2 O 5 , Z = 4, space group P 2 1 2 1 2 1 ). The Rietveld refinement results were compared with density functional theory (DFT) calculations performed with CRYSTAL14. While the structures are similar, discrepancies are observed in the configuration of the octahydroindole ring between the Rietveld and DFT structures, suggesting the refined and calculated molecules are diastereomers.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.003 |
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".