MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2873519758 · doi:10.1021/acs.oprd.8b00145

Continuous Flow Process for Reductive Deoxygenation of ω-Chloroketone in the Synthesis of Vilazodone

2018· article· en· W2873519758 on OpenAlexaff
Avedis Karadeolian, Dineshkumar Patel, B. Prabhudas, Gamini Weeratunga, Boris I. Gorin

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganic Process Research & Development · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques Innovation
Canadian institutionsApotex Pharmachem (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeoxygenationYield (engineering)Sodium borohydrideContinuous stirred-tank reactorChemistryBoraneIndole testContinuous flowProcess (computing)Flow chemistryProcess engineeringChemical engineeringCombinatorial chemistryOrganic chemistryCatalysisMaterials scienceComputer scienceMetallurgyPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A continuous flow process for the reductive deoxygenation of 3-(4-chlorobutanoyl)-1 H -indole-5-carbonitrile to 3-(4-chlorobutyl)-1 H -indole-5-carbonitrile was developed using a continuous stirred tank reactor (CSTR) setup. The opportunity for process optimization as well as scale-up feasibility was investigated at a laboratory scale. Advantages of a continuous process such as increased product yield, minimized impurity formation, enhanced safety, and increased overall purity of the isolated material thereby avoiding a purification step were demonstrated. Both sodium borohydride and a borane·THF complex were explored as reducing agents in conjunction with iron trichloride which produced high purity 3-(4-chlorobutyl)-1 H -indole-5-carbonitrile not requiring further purification in higher yield than the standard batch process.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.298 · 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
GenreMethods

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 venueOrganic Process Research & DevelopmentSame topicInnovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques InnovationFrench-language works237,207