Bibliographic record
Abstract
The enantioselectivity of alkene reduction usually depends on the geometric purity of the alkene. Bruce H. Lipshutz of the University of California, Santa Barbara used ( Organic Lett. 2007, 9, 4713) carboalumination of the alkyne 1 to prepare 2, which was selectively reduced to 3 in high ee. André B. Charette of the Université de Montréal reported ( Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2007, 46, 5955) a related reduction of unsaturated sulfones such as 4. Juan C. Carretero of the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid has developed ( J. Org. Chem. 2007, 72, 9924) a complementary route to enantiomerically-enriched sulfones, by conjugate addition to the unsaturated pyridyl sulfone 6 . Specifically for styrene derivatives, Hans-Günther Schmalz of the University of Cologne has shown (Organic Lett. 2007, 9, 3555) that the product 11 from enantioselective Rh-catalyzed hydroboration can be homologated to 13. Conjugate addition of stabilized carbanions can also be carried out with high enantiocontrol. David A. Evans of Harvard University has described (J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 11583) the Ni-catalyzed addition of malonate 15 to nitroalkenes such as 14. Claudio Palomo of the Universidad de País Vasco (Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2007, 46, 8431) and concurrently Yujiro Hayashi of the Tokyo University of Science (Organic Lett. 2007, 9, 5307) have developed organocatalytic protocols for the addition of nitromethane 18 to unsaturated aldehydes such as 17. J. Michael Chong of the University of Waterloo has found (J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 4908) that the Binol-mediated enantioselective conjugate addition of alkenylboronic acids such as 22 required the additional activation of the aryl ketone. Shun-Jun Li of Suzhou University and Teck-Peng Loh of Nanyang Technical University have extended (J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 276) enantioselective conjugate to unsaturated esters such as 24 to more highly substituted Grignard reagents. Alexandre Alexakis of the University of Geneva has demonstrated (Tetrahedron Lett. 2007, 48, 7408) that Ac2O is compatible with Et2 Zn conjugate addition conditions, leading directly to the trapped enolate 27. Selective cleavage of 27 can then be used to prepare acyclic derivatives.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".