Understanding the Origin of Selectivity in the Asymmetric Lithiation Reaction of N-Heterocycles: A Theoretical Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The natural abundance of the N-heterocycle containing compounds has pushed the synthetic community toward the invention of new synthetic methods that result in the structural diversity of N-heterocycles. Among this, is the efficient and highly selective diamine mediated asymmetric lithiation process. Amongst the diamine chiral ligands, (-)-sparterine, which is a naturally occurring alkaloid proved to be an efficient one. Many successful, good yielding and highly selective lithiation reactions have been accomplished with the mediation by this chiral diamine base. Although, there are some examples of experimental and theoretical mechanistic studies in the literature, there is a lack of detailed understanding as to how it exactly induces the chirality. In this thesis is described a systematic investigation of how (-)-sparteine influences the stereoselectivity in the course of asymmetric lithiation reaction. This led us to the establishment of the function of A-ring’s β-CH2 effect and D-ring effect. Consequently, the importance of the A-ring and D-ring portions of (-)-sparteine in the stereoselectivity is unraveled. Another part of this thesis deals with the asymmetric lithiation of BF3-activated N,N- dimethylaminoferrocene in the presence of (1R, 2R)-N1,N2-bis(3,3-dimethylbutyl)-N1,N2-dimethylcyclohexane-1,2-diamine ( a (R,R)-TMCDA surrogate) with i-PrLi. Computational findings were in full accord with the experimental observations. Subsequently, the theoretically provided insights into the mechanism of the reaction were exploited in computational design of a new ligand. Unfortunately, the outcome of this design was not experimentally robust and an updated approach towards a successful design was explained.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".