MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413753629 · doi:10.1055/a-2681-5829

Charge-Enhanced Hydrogen Bond and Brønsted Acid Catalysis: An Evolving Frontier

2025· article· en· W4413753629 on OpenAlexafffund
Srini Vemulapalli, Brandon White, Nenad Kovljenic, Travis Dudding

Bibliographic record

VenueSynthesis · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCatalytic C–H Functionalization Methods
Canadian institutionsBrock University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryCatalysisBrønsted–Lowry acid–base theoryHydrogen bondFrontierAcid catalysisCharge (physics)Organic chemistryPhotochemistryMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In catalysis, both rate acceleration and selectivity are of central importance, and strategies to achieve these outcomes remain fundamental to advancing synthetic methodology. Over the past two decades, the merger of traditional catalytic paradigms with charge-enhancing elements has led to unprecedented reactivity in bond-forming processes with broad synthetic utility. These systems augmented by charge are increasingly attracting attention for their unique modes of activation. In particular, this review highlights and contextualizes recent advancements in charge-enhanced hydrogen bond and Brønsted acid catalysis that enable novel activation modes complementary to traditional catalytic platforms. Special emphasis is placed on catalysts such as amidinium, cyclopropenium, and azolium ions as well as cationic thiourea and phosphoric acids, whose charge-enhanced features have enabled transformative improvements in reactivity, rate acceleration, and selectivity.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSynthesisSame topicCatalytic C–H Functionalization MethodsFrench-language works237,207