Bibliographic record
Abstract
Huanfeng Jiang of the South China University of Technology showed (J. Org. Chem. 2010, 75, 966) that an alkynoate 1 could be condensed with a 1,3-dicarbonyl compound 2 to give, under oxidizing conditions, the furan 3. Phil Ho Lee of Kangwon National University found (Tetrahedron Lett. 2010, 51, 1899) that the enyne 4 cyclized smoothly to the furan 5. Yahong Li of Suzhou University and Vladimir Gevorgyan of the University of Illinois, Chicago, demonstrated (J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010, 132, 7645) that the cyclization of 6 proceeded with silyl migration, to give 7. François Bilodeau and Pat Forgione of Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) optimized (J. Org. Chem. 2010, 75, 1550) the Pd-mediated decarboxylative coupling of a furoic acid 8 with 9 to give 10. This protocol also worked well with pyrrole carboxylic acids. In another transformation of a preformed pyrrole, Masatomo Iwao of Nagasaki University observed (Organic Lett. 2010, 12, 2734) that in the presence of LDA/diisopropylamine, the initially formed 2-anion from the deprotonation of 11 gave the 2-product 12 with more reactive electrophiles but the 5-product 13 with less reactive electrophiles. Umasish Jana of Jadavpur University developed (J. Org. Chem. 2010, 75, 1674) a route to more highly substituted pyrroles such as 17 using the remarkable four-component coupling of 14, 15, and 16 with nitromethane, the carbon of which was incorporated in the product. Laura L. Anderson, also of the University of Illinois, Chicago, designed (Organic Lett. 2010, 12, 2290) a clever approach to pyrroles, based on the Ir-catalyzed rearrangement of O-allyl oximes such as 18. Xiaofeng Tong of the East China University of Science and Technology reported (Chem. Commun. 2010, 312) the condensation of 20 with 21 to give the dihydropyridine 22. Base-mediated elimination of sulfinate could convert 22 into the pyridine. Jin-Quan Yu of Scripps/La Jolla found (Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2010, 49, 1275) that Pd-mediated activation of the nictotinamide 23 proceeded with high regioselectivity, leading to 25. Zhiping Li of Remnin University of China demonstrated (J. Org. Chem. 2010, 75, 4636) that the chloroenamine 26 cyclized to the indole 27 on exposure to NaI.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".