High‐Throughput Ligand Screening Enables the Enantioselective Conjugate Borylation of Cyclobutenones to Access Synthetically Versatile Tertiary Cyclobutylboronates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Cyclobutane rings are important in medicinal chemistry, yet few enantioselective methods exist to access this scaffold. In particular, cyclobutylboronates are receiving increasing attention in the literature due to the synthetic versatility of alkylboronic esters and the increasing role of boronic acids in drug discovery. Herein, a conjugate borylation of α‐alkyl,β‐aryl/alkyl cyclobutenones is reported leading to the first synthesis of enantioenriched tertiary cyclobutylboronates. Cyclobutanones with two stereogenic centers are obtained in good to high yield, with high enantioselectivity and diastereoselectivity. Vital to this advance are the development of a novel approach to α,β unsymmetrically disubstituted cyclobutenone substrates and the use of a high‐throughput chiral ligand screening platform. The synthetic utility of both the boronic ester and ketone functionalities is displayed, with remarkable chemoselectivity for either group being possible in this small ring scaffold.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".