Synthesis of Benzodihydrofurans by Asymmetric C−H Insertion Reactions of Donor/Donor Rhodium Carbenes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Metal carbenes appended with two electron‐donating groups, known as “donor/donor” carbenes, undergo diastereo‐ and enantioselective rhodium‐catalyzed C−H insertion reactions with ether substrates to form benzodihydrofurans. Unlike the reactions of metal carbenes with electron‐withdrawing groups attached, the attenuated electrophilicity enables these reactions to be conducted in Lewis basic solvents (e.g., acetonitrile) and in the presence of water. The diazo precursors for these species are prepared in situ from hydrazone using a mild and chemoselective oxidant (MnO2). Although this sequence often can be performed in one‐pot, control experiments have elucidated why a “two‐pot” process is often more efficient. A thorough screening of achiral catalysts demonstrated that sterically encumbered catalysts are optimal for diastereoselective reactions. Although efficient insertion into allylic and propargylic C−H bonds is observed, competing dipolar cycloaddition processes are noted for some substrates. The full substrate scope of this useful method of benzodihydrofuran synthesis, mechanisms of side reactions, and computational support for the origins of stereoselectivity are described.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".