Competition between C–C and C–H Bond Fluorination: A Continuum of Electron Transfer and Hydrogen Atom Transfer Mechanisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2015, we reported a photochemical method for directed C–C bond cleavage/radical fluorination of relatively unstrained cyclic acetals using Selectfluor and catalytic 9-fluorenone. Herein, we provide a detailed mechanistic study of this reaction, during which it was discovered that the key electron transfer step proceeds through substrate oxidation from a Selectfluor-derived N -centered radical intermediate (rather than through initially suspected photoinduced electron transfer). This finding led to proof of concept for two new methodologies, demonstrating that unstrained C–C bond fluorination can also be achieved under chemical and electrochemical conditions. Moreover, as C–C and C–H bond fluorination reactions are both theoretically possible on 2-aryl-cycloalkanone acetals and would involve the same reactive intermediate, we studied the competition between single-electron transfer (SET) and apparent hydrogen-atom transfer (HAT) pathways in acetal fluorination reactions using density functional theory. Finally, these analyses were applied more broadly to other classes of C–H and C–C bond fluorination reactions developed over the past decade, addressing the feasibility of SET processes masquerading as HAT in C–H fluorination literature.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".