MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3128601595 · doi:10.1039/d0cs00702a

Catalytic asymmetric transformations of oxa- and azabicyclic alkenes

2021· review· en· W3128601595 on OpenAlexaff
Sundaravel Vivek Kumar, Andy Yen, Mark Lautens, Patrick J. Guiry

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Society Reviews · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCatalytic C–H Functionalization Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto Public Health
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundIrish Research CouncilScience Foundation Ireland
KeywordsEnantioselective synthesisCatalysisChemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oxa- and azabicyclic alkenes can be readily activated by transition-metal complexes with facial selectivity, because of the intrinsic reactivity of strained bicyclic structures. Synthetically, these compounds are important synthons that offer an important platform for the construction of biologically/medicinally significant compounds with two or more stereocenters. This Review comprehensively compiles the diverse catalytic processes involving the enantioselective transformations of oxa- and azabicyclic alkenes. It has been organized according to reaction type, including asymmetric ring opening (ARO) reactions, hydrofunctionalizations, cycloadditions and C-H activation reactions. The ARO section has been subdivided based on the type of nucleophiles employed, and further subdivided based on the metal used, with a separate topic dedicated to asymmetric ring-opening metathesis. Lastly, the presentation of each method/group of reactions is accompanied by concise discussions on their advantages and limitations.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations86
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical Society ReviewsSame topicCatalytic C–H Functionalization MethodsFrench-language works237,207