MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400966082 · doi:10.1002/ange.202410363

Direct Excitation Strategy for Deacylative Couplings of Ketones

2024· article· en· W4400966082 on OpenAlexaff
Jianbin Li, Ding Zhang, Lida Tan, Chao‐Jun Li

Bibliographic record

VenueAngewandte Chemie · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicRadical Photochemical Reactions
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcitationChemistryCombinatorial chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The homolysis of chemical bonds represents one of the most fundamental reactivities of excited molecules. Historically, it has been exploited to generate radicals under ultraviolet (UV) light irradiation. However, unlike most contemporary radical‐generating mechanisms, the direct excitation to homolyze chemical bonds and produce aliphatic carbon‐centered radicals under visible light remains rare, especially in metallaphotoredox cross couplings. Herein, we present our design of the dihydropyrimidoquinolinone (DHPQ) reagents derived from ketones, which can undergo formal deacylation and homolytic C−C bond cleavage to release alkyl radicals without external photocatalysts. Spectroscopic and computational analysis reveal unique optical and structural features of DHPQs, rationalizing their faster kinetics in alkyl radical generation than a structurally similar but visible‐light transparent radical precursor. Such a capability allows DHPQ to facilitate a wide range of Ni‐metallaphotoredox cross couplings with aryl, alkynyl and acyl halides. Other catalytic and non‐catalyzed alkylative transformations of DHPQs are also feasible with various radical acceptors. We believe this work would be of broad interest, aiding the synthetic planning with simplified operation and expanding the synthetic reach of photocatalyst‐free approaches in cutting‐edge research.

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)0.000
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 score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score0.571

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAngewandte ChemieSame topicRadical Photochemical ReactionsFrench-language works237,207