Synthesis and decarboxylation of Δ<sup>2</sup>-cephem-4,4-dicarboxylic acids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Penicillin V was converted in 14 steps into Δ2-cephems having hydrogen at C-3, hydrogen or ethyl at C-2, and two methoxycarbonyl, two benzyloxycarbonyl, or one methoxycarbonyl and one benzyloxycarbonyl substituent at C-4. Deprotection of these Δ2-cephem-4,4-dicarboxylic acid esters by alkaline hydrolysis (in the case of methyl esters) or hydrogenolysis (in the case of benzyl esters) led in all cases to rapid decarboxylation of the Δ2-cephem-4,4-dicarboxylic acid or Δ2-cephem-4,4-dicarboxylic acid monoester. With hydrogen at C-2, hydrolysis of the dimethyl ester with 1 equiv of base produced a Δ2-cephem. With 2 equiv of base, and with all compounds having methyl at C-2, hydrolysis or hydrogenolysis afforded 4α-substituted-Δ2-cephems. In contrast, simpler benzyl or methyl acetamidomalonates could be deprotected without difficulty to afford stable malonic acids. Reasons for the differences in ease of decarboxylation were examined using semiempirical (AM1) and ab initio (3-21G) molecular orbital calculations. The decarboxylation barriers of unionized cephem or acetamido malonic acids were found to be high (3540 kcal mol1). Although the monoanion of acetamidomalonic acid retained a high barrier, the epimeric monoanions of a Δ2-cephem malonic acid decarboxylated with barriers of only 2 kcal mol1.Key words: mercaptoazetidinone, bromomalonate esters, MO calculations, sulfoxides, hydrogenolysis.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".