MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174151229 · doi:10.1021/jacs.1c04181

Mechanism of Electrochemical Generation and Decomposition of Phthalimide- <i>N</i> -oxyl

2021· article· en· W3174151229 on OpenAlexafffund
Cheng Yang, Luke A. Farmer, Derek A. Pratt, Stephen Maldonado, Corey R. J. Stephenson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Chemical Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicElectrocatalysts for Energy Conversion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersDivision of ChemistryDivision of Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental, and Transport SystemsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of MichiganU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsChemistryPhthalimideCatalysisElectrochemistryDecompositionElectrolysisElectron transferBase (topology)Hydrogen atomCombinatorial chemistryPhotochemistryOrganic chemistryElectrodePhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Phthalimide N-oxyl (PINO) is a potent hydrogen atom transfer (HAT) catalyst that can be generated electrochemically from N-hydroxyphthalimide (NHPI). However, catalyst decomposition has limited its application. This paper details mechanistic studies of the generation and decomposition of PINO under electrochemical conditions. Voltammetric data, observations from bulk electrolysis, and computational studies suggest two primary aspects. First, base-promoted formation of PINO from NHPI occurs via multiple-site concerted proton–electron transfer (MS-CPET). Second, PINO decomposition occurs by at least two second-order paths, one of which is greatly enhanced by base. Optimal catalytic efficiency in PINO-catalyzed oxidations occurs in the presence of bases whose corresponding conjugate acids have pKa’s in the range of ∼11–15, which strikes a balance between promoting PINO formation and minimizing its decay.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.338

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.226 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations85
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Chemical SocietySame topicElectrocatalysts for Energy ConversionFrench-language works237,207