MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410080505 · doi:10.1139/cjc-2025-0023

[1,5] Sigmatropic rearrangements in silolides and germolides—a computational investigation

2025· article· en· W4410080505 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chenghuan Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicOrganic Chemistry Cycloaddition Reactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsChemistrySigmatropic reactionComputational chemistryStereochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[1,5] Sigmatropic rearrangements of different groups R in anionic sila- and germacyclopentadienes (silolides and germolides) were studied by density functional methods. This investigation was prompted by our recent finding that silylene-substituted 1 H-silolides and 1 H-germolides rearrange to the corresponding 2 H-isomers (Chem. Commun. 2024, 60, 11295). The anionic 2 H-silolides and germolides feature a negatively charged E=C double bond (E = Si, Ge) that is integrated in a cyclopentadienyl system. The aim of this computational study is to enable the use of the full synthetic capacity of these novel compounds by identifying optimal substitution patterns at the siloles and germoles that allow their synthesis. The results of our computational study suggest that electron-withdrawing substituents (either by π-resonance or by negative hyperconjugation) at the carbon atom of the E=C double bond significantly favours the 2 H-tetrolides over the 1 H-isomer. In addition, the computations revealed that migrating electropositive groups R such as silyl, boryl, or silylenyl have small calculated barriers for the [1,5] sigmatropic rearrangement (Δ G ‡ < 50 kJ mol −1 ), which allow the 1 H tetrolide → 2 H tetrolide isomerisation to occur at ambient conditions.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.203 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicOrganic Chemistry Cycloaddition ReactionsFrench-language works237,207