MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006293148 · doi:10.1021/acs.oprd.0c00018

Exploring Homogeneous Conditions for Mild Buchwald–Hartwig Amination in Batch and Flow

2020· article· en· W3006293148 on OpenAlexafffund
Saeed K. Kashani, Jacob E. Jessiman, Stephen G. Newman

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganic Process Research & Development · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCatalytic Cross-Coupling Reactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsAminationXantphosChemistrySonogashira couplingHomogeneousFunctional groupCombinatorial chemistryContinuous flowBase (topology)BorylationOrganic chemistryCatalysisPalladiumBiochemical engineeringArylMathematicsPolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cross-couplings are among the most frequently used reactions in complex molecule synthesis. However, the requirement of stoichiometric base can cause challenges. Harsh, insoluble inorganic bases can lead to poor tolerance of sensitive functional groups, scale-up issues, and difficult adaptation to continuous flow platforms. Herein, we describe the use of high throughput experimentation to identify a number of conditions that enable Buchwald–Hartwig reactions to be carried out using readily available ligands (e.g., XantPhos) with DBU as a soluble, functional-group-tolerant, homogeneous base. Application of this system to diverse aminations in batch and flow are demonstrated, as is the translation of this technique to performing continuous Mizoroki–Heck and Sonogashira coupling reactions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.202
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.174 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations47
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrganic Process Research & DevelopmentSame topicCatalytic Cross-Coupling ReactionsFrench-language works237,207