MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3037632372 · doi:10.1021/jacs.0c05434

Ni-Catalyzed Traceless, Directed C3-Selective C–H Borylation of Indoles

2020· article· en· W3037632372 on OpenAlexafffund
Ya‐Ming Tian, Xiaoning Guo, Zhu Wu, Alexandra Friedrich, Stephen A. Westcott, Holger Braunschweig, Udo Radius, Todd B. Marder

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Chemical Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCatalytic C–H Functionalization Methods
Canadian institutionsMount Allison University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaJulius-Maximilians-Universität WürzburgChina Scholarship CouncilDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftAlexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
KeywordsChemistryBorylationCatalysisCombinatorial chemistryStereochemistryOrganic chemistryAryl

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A highly efficient and general protocol for traceless, directed C3-selective C–H borylation of indoles with [Ni(IMes) 2 ] as the catalyst is reported. Activation and borylation of N–H bonds by [Ni(IMes) 2 ] is essential to install a Bpin moiety at the N-position as a traceless directing group, which enables the C3-selective borylation of C–H bonds. The N-Bpin group which is formed is easily converted in situ back to an N–H group by the oxidative addition product of [Ni(IMes) 2 ] and in situ -generated HBpin. The catalytic reactions are operationally simple, allowing borylation of a variety of substituted indoles with B 2 pin 2 in excellent yields and with high selectivity. The C–H borylation can be followed by Suzuki–Miyaura cross-coupling of the C-borylated indoles in an overall two-step, one-pot process providing an efficient method for synthesizing C3-functionalized heteroarenes.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations94
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Chemical SocietySame topicCatalytic C–H Functionalization MethodsFrench-language works237,207