MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409995211 · doi:10.1002/anie.202506476

Highly Enantioselective Organocatalysis with Bidentate Halogen Bond Donors

2025· article· en· W4409995211 on OpenAlexaff
Julian Wolf, Meghana Poliyodath Mohanan, Raphaël Robidas, Revannath L. Sutar, Elric Engelage, Claude Y. Legault, Stefan M. Huber

Bibliographic record

VenueAngewandte Chemie International Edition · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAsymmetric Synthesis and Catalysis
Canadian institutionsCentre in Green Chemistry and CatalysisUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsEnantioselective synthesisOrganocatalysisDenticityChemistryHalogenHalogen bondStereochemistryCombinatorial chemistryOrganic chemistryCatalysisCrystal structure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the employment of "non-classical" non-covalent interactions like halogen bonding (XB) in asymmetric catalysis is still at a very early stage, there are significant challenges to overcome. In some reported cases, the relevance of halogen bonding to the catalytic action is unclear, while in others, catalyst activity is limited. Herein, we present the second generation of a bidentate iodine(I)-based halogen bond donor as a modifiable and highly active chiral halogen bonding catalyst. With these modified derivatives, high stereocontrol of up to 98% ee could be achieved in a model Mukaiyama aldol reaction for a range of different substrates. Importantly, the crucial role of halogen bonding in this catalytic process was demonstrated by the low performance of the non-iodinated variants and by DFT calculations. The latter also indicate that the stereoinduction is based on the imposed orientation of the substrates towards each other.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations8
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAngewandte Chemie International EditionSame topicAsymmetric Synthesis and CatalysisFrench-language works237,207