Substituent Constant

14,000,000 Leading Edge Experts on the ideXlab platform

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

The Experts below are selected from a list of 132 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Xikui Jiang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Y Zhang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Nobuyoshi Hayashi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Bin Jiang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Michael Lewis - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • predicting the cation π binding of substituted benzenes energy decomposition calculations and the development of a cation π Substituent Constant
    RSC Advances, 2014
    Co-Authors: Selina Wireduaah, Trent M Parker, Christina Bagwill, Charles C Kirkpatrick, Michael Lewis
    Abstract:

    This work proposes a new Substituent Constant, termed Π+, to describe cation–π binding using computational methods at the MP2(full)/6-311++G** level of theory with Symmetry Adapted Perturbation Theory (SAPT) calculations on selected cation–π complexes. The correlations between binding strength (Ebind or ΔH298) and common parameters for describing cation–π binding (∑σm, ∑σp, ∑(σm + σp), or Θzz) are decent (r2 between 0.79 and 0.90). SAPT calculations show that variations in the electrostatic (Eele), exchange (Eexch), induction (Eind), and dispersion (Edisp) component energies to the overall binding are almost entirely due to differences in arene–cation distances (dAr–cat). Eele varies most with dAr–cat; however, Eind seems to be the primary term responsible for the ∑σm, ∑σp, ∑(σm + σp) and Θzz parameters not accurately predicting the cation–π Ebind and ΔH298 values. The Π+ parameter largely reflects electrostatics, but it also includes the impact of exchange, induction, and dispersion on cation–π binding of aromatics, and the resulting correlation between ΔH298 or Ebind and Π+ is excellent (r2 of 0.97 and 0.98, respectively). Importantly, the Π+ parameter is general to cation–π systems other than those reported here, and to studies where the cation–π binding strength is determined using computational levels different from those employed in this study.

  • Face-to-face arene-arene binding energies: dominated by dispersion but predicted by electrostatic and dispersion/polarizability Substituent Constants.
    Journal of the American Chemical Society, 2011
    Co-Authors: Michelle Watt, Charles C Kirkpatrick, Laura K.e. Hardebeck, Michael Lewis
    Abstract:

    Parallel face-to-face arene−arene complexes between benzene and substituted benzenes have been investigated at the MP2(full)/6-311G** and M05-2X/6-311G** levels of theory. A reasonably good correlation was found between the binding energies and the ∑|σm| values of the substituted aromatics. It is proposed that a Substituent |σm| value informs on both the aromatic Substituent dispersion/polarizability and the effect the Substituent has on the aromatic electrostatics. Supporting this hypothesis, a combination of electrostatic (∑σm) and dispersion/polarizability (∑Mr) Substituent Constant terms gives an excellent, and statistically significant, correlation with the benzene-substituted benzene binding energy. Symmetry adapted perturbation theory energy decomposition calculations show the dominant attractive force is dispersion; however, the sum of all nonelectrostatic forces is essentially a Constant, while the electrostatic component varies significantly. This explains the importance of including an electros...