MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388592892 · doi:10.1002/chem.202302950

Synthesis of π‐Conjugated Chiral Aza/Boracyclophanes with a <i>meta</i> and <i>para</i> Substitution

2023· article· en· W4388592892 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kai Zhang, Mengyao Hao, Tianyun Jin, Yafei Shi, Guoqing Tian, Chenglong Li, Hongwei Ma, Niu Zhang, Quan‐Song Li, Pangkuan Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistry - A European Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSynthesis and Properties of Aromatic Compounds
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBeijing Institute of TechnologyNatural Science Foundation of Beijing MunicipalityQueen's UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsRacemizationConjugated systemChemistrySubstitution (logic)Ring (chemistry)Enantioselective synthesisStereochemistryCombinatorial chemistryCatalysisOrganic chemistryPolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We herein describe the synthesis of a new class of axially chiral aza/boracyclophanes (BDN1, BXN1, BDB1 and BXB1) using binaphthyls as chiral building blocks and the main-group (B/N) chemistry with tunable electronic effects. All macrocycles substituted with triarylamine donors or triarylborane acceptors are strongly luminescent. These macrocycles showed two distinct meta and para π-conjugation pathways, leading to the formation of quasi figure-of-eight and square-shaped conformations. Interestingly, comparison of such structural models revealed that the former type of macrocycles BXN1 and BXB1 gave higher racemization barriers relative to the other ones. The results reported here may provide a new approach to engineer the optical stability of π-conjugated chiral macrocycles by controlling π-substitution patterns. The ring constraints induced by macrocyclization were also demonstrated to contribute to the configurational persistence as compared with the open-chain analogues p-BTT and m-BTT.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.853

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemistry - A European JournalSame topicSynthesis and Properties of Aromatic CompoundsFrench-language works237,207