MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4240772983 · doi:10.1021/bk-2001-0783.ch010

Enantioselective Cyclopropanation Using Dioxaborolane Ligands

2001· book-chapter· en· W4240772983 on OpenAlexaff
André B. Charette, Carmela Molinaro

Bibliographic record

VenueACS symposium series · 2001
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCyclopropane Reaction Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCyclopropanationEnantioselective synthesisEnantiopure drugAllylic rearrangementTartaric acidBromideChemistryOrganic chemistryStoichiometryCombinatorial chemistryCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Enantiopure cyclopropanes are important subunits found in several natural products. This chapter will highlight our efforts to design a stoichiometric chiral additive for the enantioselective cyclopropanation of allylic alcohols (Eq 1). Some preliminary mechanistic features of the cyclopropanation reaction in the presence of dioxaborolane 1 and related analogs will also be presented. I. Synthesis The chiral dioxaborolane 1 can be prepared using either one of two procedures. Originally, this dioxaborolane was generated under dehydrating conditions by using two readily available precursors: N, N, N', N '-tetramethyl-L-tartaramide 2 and butylboronic acid 3 (Eq 2). These two precursors are commercially available, or easily prepared from tartaric acid (in the case of the tartaramide ( 44 )) and from butyl magnesium bromide and trimethyl borate (in the case of the butylboronic acid ( 45 )). It is not that convenient to store alkylboronic acids since these compounds are quite oxygen-sensitive. Indeed, 3 is gradually oxidized to generate

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.224
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS symposium seriesSame topicCyclopropane Reaction MechanismsFrench-language works237,207