MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2795926106 · doi:10.1002/jhet.3153

Phosphotungstic Acid Catalyzed One Pot Synthesis of 4,8,8‐Trimethyl‐5‐phenyl‐5,5a,8,9‐tetrahydrobenzo[b] [1,8]Naphthyridin‐6(7H)‐one Derivatives and Their Biological Evaluation Against A549 Lung Cancer Cells

2018· article· en· W2795926106 on OpenAlexaff
Talent Raymond Makhanya, Robert Moonsamy Gengan, P. Pitchai, Anil A. Chuturgoon, Charlette Tiloke, Atha Atar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Heterocyclic Chemistry · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSynthesis and biological activity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
FundersDurban University of Technology
KeywordsChemistryPhosphotungstic acidCatalysisBenzaldehydeCyclohexaneViability assaySolventOne-pot synthesisA549 cellOrganic chemistryCombinatorial chemistryNuclear chemistryCellBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A facile one pot multicomponent synthesis of 1,8‐naphthyridinone derivatives was developed using a mild and reusable phosphotungstic acid catalyst. A 2‐amino picoline, benzaldehyde derivatives and 1,3‐dicarbonyl cyclohexane were used to synthesize 1,8‐naphthyridinones, which was achieved by conventional heating under solvent‐free conditions. All synthesized compounds were characterized by spectral analysis and screened for anticancer activity against A549 lung cancer cells. The results from the cell viability assay showed that the synthesized compounds do have a biological effect at various concentrations on the lung cancer cells. Compounds 4F‐p‐CF3 and 4H‐VAN showed potential as an antiproliferative agent and a dose‐dependent decline in cell viability was observed.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations12
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Heterocyclic ChemistrySame topicSynthesis and biological activityFrench-language works237,207