MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3168485704 · doi:10.1002/tcr.202100119

Iodine(III)‐Based Halogen Bond Donors: Properties and Applications

2021· review· en· W3168485704 on OpenAlexafffund
Raphaël Robidas, Dominik L. Reinhard, Claude Y. Legault, Stefan M. Huber

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Chemical Record · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCrystallography and molecular interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCentre in Green Chemistry and CatalysisCompute CanadaUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsHalogen bondHalogenLewis acids and basesCovalent bondChemistryIodineCatalysisCombinatorial chemistryComputational chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Halogen bonding, the non-covalent interaction of Lewis bases with an electron-deficient region of halogen substituents, received increased attention recently. Consequently, the design and evaluation of numerous halogen-containing species as halogen bond donors have been subject to intense research. More recently, organoiodine compounds at the iodine(III) state have been receiving growing attention in the field. Due to their electronic and structural properties, they provide access to unique binding modes. For this reason, our groups have been involved in the development of such compounds, in the quantification of their halogen bonding strength (through the evaluation of their Lewis acidities), as well as in the evaluation of their activities as catalysts in several model reactions. This account will describe these contributions.

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations95
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Chemical RecordSame topicCrystallography and molecular interactionsFrench-language works237,207