Regioselectivity study of 1,3-dipolar cycloaddition of 2-azido-N-(4-diazenylphenyl)acetamide with terminal alkyne through DFT analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mechanism and regioselectivity of 1,3-dipolar reaction of 2-azido-N-(4-diazenylphenyl) acetamide and an alkyne have been studied in gas phase and in DMSO using the B3LYP-GD3 functional and 6-31G(d,p) basis set. The reaction followed a one-step mechanism with asynchronous TSs. The calculated global reactivity indices calculated revealed, among other things, the nucleophile character of the 2-azido-N-(4-diazenylphenyl)acetamide and the electrophile character of the alkyne (4-bromo-2-chloro-1-ethynylbenzene), in addition to an electron transfer from the 4-bromo-2-chloro-1-ethynylbenzene towards the 2-azido-N-(4-diazenylphenyl) acetamide. The calculated local reactivity indices predicted the formation of the 1,4-triazole, with the most nucleophilic nitrogen and the most electrophilic carbon favoring its formation. However, analysis of the activation energies and thermochemistry parameters showed that the 1,5 triazole is energetically favorable and more stable under thermodynamic control. Bond order analysis coupled with bond formation evolution and the solvent effect was further investigated to support and highlight the asynchronicity in bond formation and the regioselectivity of the reaction, respectively.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".