Designing kinetically stable aryltrifluoroborates as <sup>18</sup>F‐capture agents for PET imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One‐step 18 F‐radiolabeling of peptides and other large biomolecules has been challenged by a critical gap in chemical compatibility between fluoride anion, which is unreactive as a nucleophile in water, and large biomolecules such as peptides that are insoluble in dry solvents. Traditionally, this disparity has been overcome through the preliminary synthesis of an 18 F‐labeled radioprosthetic group that is appended to peptides following at least one additional step. Ideally, however, peptides should be labeled in a single aqueous step. Hence, we proposed the use of arylboronic acids as captors of aqueous 18 F‐fluoride ion to simplify the radiosynthesis of 18 F‐aryltrifluoroborate bioconjugates. Yet, the use of aryltrifluoroborates as radioprosthetic groups can only be considered if kinetically stable ones can be designed. Herein, we discuss the kinetic and thermodynamic parameters review our previous use of a Hammett analysis that can inform the design of kinetically stable 18 F‐labeled aryltrifluoroborates for use as novel radioprosthetic groups. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".