New bis 1,3,4-oxadiazole derivatives: syntheses, characterizations, computational studies, and antioxidant activities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, two new bis oxadiazole derivatives (2a and 2b) were synthesized. The new compounds were characterized by elemental analyses, IR, 1H NMR, 13C NMR, and mass spectral studies and were tested for their antioxidant activity. According to the results, it was observed that the synthesized compounds (2a and 2b) had a very high activity in both 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) and ferric reducing ability of plasma (FRAP) tests. The approximate geometries of the compounds 2a and 2b were prepared with GaussView5 visualization program. The optimized molecular geometric parameters, vibrational wavenumbers, UV–vis parameters, and HOMO–LUMO simulations were computed using Gaussian 09W program. The computations were performed at 6-311++G(d,p) basis set using the B3LYP functional in density functional theory (DFT) method. The harmonic vibrational wavenumbers computed in gas phase were scaled with 0.958 (1700–4000 cm−1) and 0.983 (0–1700 cm−1) for the B3LYP/6-311++G(d,p) level. To calculated the UV–vis spectroscopic parameters with TD-DFT method, the compounds 2a and 2b were optimized in DMF and DMSO solvents using the integral equation formalism polarizable continuum model (IEFPCM) method at the B3LYP/6-311++G(d,p) level. The HOMO, LUMO, and UV–vis analyses were studied to interpret intramolecular charge transfers.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".