MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2762456142 · doi:10.1021/acs.inorgchem.7b02217

Phosphorus-Chalcogen Ring Expansion and Metal Coordination

2017· article· en· W2762456142 on OpenAlexafffund
Cameron M. E. Graham, Juuso Valjus, Taylor E. Pritchard, Paul D. Boyle, Heikki M. Tuononen, Paul J. Ragogna

Bibliographic record

VenueInorganic Chemistry · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSynthesis and characterization of novel inorganic/organometallic compounds
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaJyväskylän Yliopisto
KeywordsChemistryChalcogenPhosphinideneRing (chemistry)Reactivity (psychology)ChalcogenideMetalLewis acids and basesPhosphorusDensity functional theoryAromaticityAtom (system on chip)CrystallographyStereochemistryMoleculeComputational chemistryCatalysisOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The reactivity of 4-membered (RPCh) 2 rings (Ch = S, Se) that contain phosphorus in the +3 oxidation state is reported. These compounds undergo ring expansion to (RPCh) 3 with the addition of a Lewis base. The 6-membered rings were found to be more stable than the 4-membered precursors, and the mechanism of their formation was investigated experimentally and by density functional theory calculations. The computational work identified two plausible mechanisms involving a phosphinidene chalcogenide intermediate, either as a free species or stabilized by a suitable base. Both the 4- and 6-membered rings were found to react with coinage metals, giving the same products: (RPCh) 3 rings bound to the metal center from the phosphorus atom in tripodal fashion.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInorganic ChemistrySame topicSynthesis and characterization of novel inorganic/organometallic compoundsFrench-language works237,207