Shining Light on the Light-Bearing Element: A Brief Review of Photomediated C–H Phosphorylation Reactions
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Organophosphorus compounds have numerous useful applications, from versatile ligands and nucleophiles in the case of trivalent organophosphorus species to therapeutics, agrochemicals and material additives for pentavalent species. Although phosphorus chemistry is a fairly mature field, the construction of C–P(V) bonds relies heavily on either prefunctionalized substrates such as alkyl or aryl halides, or requires previously oxidized bonds such as C=N or C=O, leading to potential sustainability issues when looking at the overall synthetic route. In light of the recent advances in photochemistry, using photons as a reagent can provide better alternatives for phosphorylations by unlocking radical mechanisms and providing interesting redox pathways. This review will showcase the different photomediated phosphorylation procedures available for converting C–H bonds into C–P(V) bonds. 1 Introduction 1.1 Organophosphorus Compounds 1.2 Phosphorylation: Construction of C–P(V) Bonds 1.3 Photochemistry as an Alternative to Classical Phosphorylations 2 Ionic Mechanisms Involving Nucleophilic Additions 3 Mechanisms Involving Radical Intermediates 3.1 Mechanisms Involving Reactive Carbon Radicals 3.2 Mechanisms Involving Phosphorus Radicals 3.2.1 Photoredox: Direct Creation of Phosphorus Radicals 3.2.2 Photoredox: Indirect Creation of Phosphorus Radicals 3.2.3 Dual Catalysis 3.3 Photolytic Cleavage 4 Conclusion and Outlook
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it