Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix: Stereo handling for double bridgehead case #584

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 2, 2024

Conversation

avcopan
Copy link
Collaborator

@avcopan avcopan commented Nov 29, 2024

The case is:

 C1CC2[CH]C1O2 => [CH]1CC2CC1O2
 ^  *  ^  *        ^    * ^*
 [* marks the first pair of bridgehead stereo atoms]
 [^ marks the first pair of bridgehead stereo atoms]

This case challenges the current stereo-reversibility implementation.

The problem: The internal H transfer switches breaking and forming bonds in the TS graph. The canonical direction comparison was returning None for this process because the representations of the forward and reverse direction were identical. This has been partially fixed by adding a stereo parity component back into the representation, but it seems there is still something wrong (possibly some cases are still yielding identical representations -- I haven't yet investigated).

The case is:
```
 C1CC2[CH]C1O2 => [CH]1CC2CC1O2
 ^  *  ^  *        ^    * ^*
 [* marks the first pair of bridgehead stereo atoms]
 [^ marks the first pair of bridgehead stereo atoms]
```
This case challenges the current stereo-reversibility implementation.

The problem: The internal H transfer switches breaking and forming bonds
in the TS graph. The canonical direction comparison was returning `None`
for this process because the representations of the forward and reverse
direction were identical. This has been partially fixed by adding a
stereo parity component back into the representation, but it seems there
is still something wrong (possibly some cases are still yielding
identical representations -- I haven't yet investigated).
@avcopan avcopan merged commit ae8d6f7 into Auto-Mech:dev Dec 2, 2024
3 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant