MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417089108 · doi:10.1107/s2056989025010679

Synthesis and structure of <i>N</i> -(perfluorophenyl)isonicotinamide

2025· article· en· W4417089108 on OpenAlexafffund
Arindam Saha, Garry S. Hanan, Mihaela Cibian

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Crystallographica Section E Crystallographic Communications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCrystal structures of chemical compounds
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesUniversité de MontréalCentre québécois sur les matériaux fonctionnelsCentre in Green Chemistry and CatalysisUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
KeywordsStackingAmideHydrogen bondAtom (system on chip)Group (periodic table)TwistRing (chemistry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The title compound [systematic name: N -(2,3,4,5,6-pentafluorophenyl)pyridine-4-carboxamide], C 12 H 5 F 5 N 2 O, crystallizes with two independent molecules ( A and B ) in the asymmetric unit in space group P 1 . The molecules adopt a conformation where the planes of the pentafluorophenyl and pyridyl rings have twist angles of 5.3 (1) and 14.5 (1)°. In the crystal, the molecules are connected by N—H...N hydrogen bonds between the amide H atom and the pyridyl nitrogen atom of an adjacent molecule to generate [ 1 10] chains of alternating A and B molecules. The packing is consolidated by C—H...π interactions, π–π stacking and C—H...O interactions and a short F...F contact of 2.7270 (13) Å occurs. The structures of related isonicotinamides are surveyed.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Crystallographica Section E Crystallographic CommunicationsSame topicCrystal structures of chemical compoundsFrench-language works237,207