ReviewThe Journal of organic chemistry2024
Exceptions, Paradoxes, and Their Resolutions in Chemical Reactivity.
Review in The Journal of organic chemistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Progress in chemistry has primarily been framed through inductive processes, leading to the frequent emergence of exceptions and unexpected reactivities. These anomalies─ranging from surprising reactivity trends and paradoxical understandings to unanticipated parameter influences and unexpected successes or failures in synthetic methods─offer valuable insights that can drive scientific discovery. While it is commonly accepted that such exceptions can drive progress, many have been passively accepted without being explored for opportunities. Although numerous chemists have addressed exceptions and refined chemical models and theories, employing a systematic framework for actively exploring and understanding the underlying causes of exceptions could resolve paradoxes in broader contexts and create a greater impact than treating anomalies as isolated occurrences. This perspective demonstrates a proactive epistemic approach to uncovering the opportunities presented by exceptions and promotes deliberate, thoughtful engagement with paradoxes and anomalies. While the examples primarily focus on physical organic chemistry, the concepts are broadly applicable across various fields in chemical science. The thinking framework presented here is neither exhaustive nor prescriptive, but it outlines one of many potentially possible ways to inspire further development in how these anomalies could be harnessed for advancement.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.