Crystal structure, Hirshfeld surface analysis and interaction energy and DFT studies of (2<i>Z</i>)-4-benzyl-2-(2,4-dichlorobenzylidene)-2<i>H</i>-1,4-benzothiazin-3(4<i>H</i>)-one
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The title compound, C 22 H 15 Cl 2 NOS, contains 1,4-benzothiazine and 2,4-dichlorobenzylidene units, where the dihydrothiazine ring adopts a screw-boat conformation. In the crystal, intermolecular C—H Bnz ...O Thz (Bnz = benzene and Thz = thiazine) hydrogen bonds form corrugated chains extending along the b -axis direction which are connected into layers parallel to the bc plane by intermolecular C—H Methy ...S Thz (Methy = methylene) hydrogen bonds, enclosing R 4 4 (22) ring motifs. Offset π-stacking interactions between 2,4-dichlorophenyl rings [centroid–centroid = 3.7701 (8) Å] and π-interactions which are associated by C—H Bnz ...π(ring) and C—H Dchlphy ...π(ring) (Dchlphy = 2,4-dichlorophenyl) interactions may be effective in the stabilization of the crystal structure. The Hirshfeld surface analysis of the crystal structure indicates that the most important contributions for the crystal packing are from H...H (29.1%), H...C/C...H (27.5%), H...Cl/Cl...H (20.6%) and O...H/H...O (7.0%) interactions. Hydrogen-bonding and van der Waals interactions are the dominant interactions in the crystal packing. Computational chemistry indicates that in the crystal, the C—H Bnz ...O Thz and C—H Methy ...S Thz hydrogen-bond energies are 55.0 and 27.1 kJ mol −1 , respectively. Density functional theory (DFT) optimized structures at the B3LYP/6-311G(d,p) level are compared with the experimentally determined molecular structure in the solid state. The HOMO–LUMO behaviour was elucidated to determine the energy gap.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it