“…The MD simulations reached equilibrium with respect to conformational preferences of the angels ϕ , θ , and ψ , as indicated by highly symmetric torsion angle distributions (Figures S17, S18, and S19 in the Supporting Information) and frequent transitions between energetically preferred states (Figures S20, S21, and S22 in the Supporting Information). In contrast, for the α‐aminoxy peptoids 1 , 2 , or 3 started either with a cis ‐ or trans ‐amide conformation, a transition in the ω torsion angle between the two conformers was not observed, which is in line with an energetic barrier separating the two conformers (Figure S16 in the Supporting Information for the N ‐ethoxyformamide model compound; Figure S23 in the Supporting Information for the α‐aminoxy peptoid 30 ( N , N ‐dimethyl‐2‐(( N ‐methylacetamido)‐oxy)acetamide) for probing the effect of an acetyl cap group and an N ‐methyl side chain) and previous work . In addition, our calculations show that the cis conformer is preferred over the trans conformer by approximately 2.8 kcal mol −1 for peptoid 30 , whereas the cis and trans conformers are virtually isoenergetic for the N ‐ethoxyformamide model compound (Figures S23 and S16 in the Supporting Information, respectively), which is consistent with cis / trans energy differences of up to 1.4 kcal mol −1 in regular (not α‐aminoxy) peptoids, as reported by Yoo and Kirshenbaum .…”