MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092643064 · doi:10.1002/chem.202004153

Iminophosphorano‐Substituted Bispyridinylidenes: Redox Potentials and Substituent Constants from Tolman Electronic Parameters

2020· article· en· W3092643064 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicholas A. Richard, Chun Keat Khor, Sydney M. Hetherington, Scott L. Mills, A. Decken, C. Adam Dyker

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistry - A European Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicChemical Reaction Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNew Brunswick Innovation FoundationCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsSubstituentRedoxChemistryPhosphineComputational chemistryStereochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Bispyridinylidenes (BPYs) have emerged as an important class of neutral organic electron donors, with redox potentials that vary widely with choice of substituent. Methods to predict the effect of substitution on the redox potential are therefore highly desirable. Here we show that the redox potential of BPYs featuring iminophosphorano substituents (R 3 P=N‐), which represent the most reducing class of BPYs, can be predicted based on the well‐known Tolman electronic parameter (TEP) for the respective phosphine fragment (R 3 P). Moreover, building on earlier work relating redox potentials to Hammett‐type substituent constants, it is now possible to quantitatively predict σ p + values for iminophosphorano substituents from TEP values. These results provide a path for precisely tailoring redox potentials of iminophosphorano‐substituted BPYs, but also give quantitative descriptors for how these highly versatile iminophosphorano substituents can impact the properties of any molecular scaffold.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemistry - A European JournalSame topicChemical Reaction MechanismsFrench-language works237,207