MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Experimental and computational structural studies of 5-substituted-3-(1-arylmethyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridin-4-yl)-1H-indoles

2021· article· en· W3174359129 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Agata Bartyzel, Magda Kondej, Piotr Stępnicki, Tomasz M. Wróbel, Agnieszka A. Kaczor

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Molecular Structure · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSynthesis and Reactivity of Heterocycles
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitut de Cardiologie de MontréalChina Scholarship CouncilNarodowe Centrum Nauki
KeywordsChemistryMoietyDihedral angleHydrogen bondCrystal structureMoleculeIndole testCrystallographyStereochemistryIntermolecular forceSupramolecular chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Four compounds ( 1–4 ) reported in our previous work as potential antipsychotics with affinity for dopamine D 2 and serotonin 5-HT 1A and 5-HT 2A receptors, were now subjected to detailed structural characterization. The X-ray analysis conducted for studied compounds proved that interatomic distances and bond angles in their crystal structures lie within normal values. The indole group in all compounds is planar, whereas tetrahydropyridine moiety exhibits almost ideal or close to half-chair conformation and is slightly or significantly rotated in relation to the indole group plane by 9.49(1)°, 30.24(11)°, 7.43(6)° and 15.98(18)° in compounds 1–4, respectively. The R 1 substituents of tetrahydropyridine group in all cases form a dihedral angle with the indole moiety with value ranging from 66.57(14)° ( 2 ) to 86.73(17)° ( 4 ). The crystal structure of 1 is stabilized by N–H···N hydrogen bonds and C–H···π interactions. The intermolecular C(12)−H(12B)··· Cg (2) interactions form a supramolecular two-dimensional network. The molecules in the crystal of 2 are linked by N–H···N. The formed chains are additionally stabilized with C–H···S hydrogen bonds. In case of compound 3 , molecule chains are formed by N–H···N hydrogen bonds and are further linked via C–H···O hydrogen bonds into layer. The crystal structure is also stabilized by intermolecular C–H···π interactions. The molecules of compound 4 are linked by N–H···N hydrogen bonds and further stabilized by intermolecular C–H···π interactions. Crystallographic analysis was complemented with computational studies, such as Frontier Molecular Orbital analysis, which indicated that all four compounds display similar chemical reactivity, regardless of different R 1 and R 2 substituents. In addition, the most reactive parts of the compounds appear to be the indole and double bond located in tetrahydropyridine moiety. Lastly, the calculations of electrostatic potential and non-covalent interactions have been performed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Molecular StructureSame topicSynthesis and Reactivity of HeterocyclesFrench-language works237,207