MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2984224722 · doi:10.1002/open.201900307

Front Cover: Mechanochemical Preparations of Anion Coordinated Architectures Based on 3‐Iodoethynylpyridine and 3‐Iodoethynylbenzoic Acid (ChemistryOpen 11/2019)

2019· paratext· en· W2984224722 on OpenAlexaff
Vincent M. Morin, Patrick M. J. Szell, Estelle Caron‐Poulin, Bulat Gabidullin, David L. Bryce

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistryOpen · 2019
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCrystallography and molecular interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHalogen bondHalogenFront coverSolid-state nuclear magnetic resonanceBromideSolid-stateDiffractionPowder diffractionCrystallographyChemistryMefenamic acidMaterials scienceCover (algebra)Organic chemistryPhysical chemistryNuclear magnetic resonanceOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Front Cover shows a stylized depiction of the mechanochemical halogen-bond induced cocrystallization of 3-iodoethynylpyridine with tetraphenylphosphonium bromide. The identity and phase purity of this and five related anion-coordinated architectures based on 3-iodoethynylpyridine and 3-iodoethynylbenzoic acid halogen bond donors are established with powder X-ray diffraction and multinuclear solid-state magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Single crystals of the pure products were also characterized by X-ray diffraction. 31P and 13C solid-state NMR offers a clear and convenient method of identifying the occurrence of halogen bonding using the crude product obtained directly from mechanochemical ball milling. More information can be found in the Full Paper by V. M. Morin et al. on page 1328 in Issue 11, 2019 (DOI: 10.1002/open.201900194).

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

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)0.1210.030

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemistryOpenSame topicCrystallography and molecular interactionsFrench-language works237,207