Archive for May, 2017

Nanobelt

The synthesis of components of nanostructures (like fullerenes and nanotubes) has dramatically matured over the past few years. I have blogged about nanohoops before, and this post presents the recent work of the Itami group in preparing the nanobelt 1.1


1

The synthesis is accomplished through a series of Wittig reactions with an aryl-aryl coupling to stitch together the final rings. The molecule is characterized by NMR and x-ray crystallography. The authors have also computed the structure of 1 at B3LYP/6-31G(d), shown in Figure 1. The computed C-C distances match up very well with the experimental distances. The strain energy of 1, presumably estimated by Reaction 1,2 is computed to be about 119 kcal mol-1.

1

Figure 1. B3LYP/6-31G(d) optimized structure of 1.

Rxn 1

NICS(0) values were obtained at B3LYP/6-311+G(2d,p)//B3LYP/6-31G(d); the rings along the middle of the belt have values of -7.44ppm and are indicative of normal aromatic 6-member rings, while the other rings have values of -2.00ppm. This suggests the dominant resonance structure shown below:

References

1) Povie, G.; Segawa, Y.; Nishihara, T.; Miyauchi, Y.; Itami, K., "Synthesis of a carbon nanobelt." Science 2017, 356, 172-175, DOI: 10.1126/science.aam8158.

2) Segawa, Y.; Yagi, A.; Ito, H.; Itami, K., "A Theoretical Study on the Strain Energy of Carbon Nanobelts." Org. Letters 2016, 18, 1430-1433, DOI: 10.1021/acs.orglett.6b00365.

InChIs:

1: InChI=1S/C48H24/c1-2-26-14-40-28-5-6-31-20-44-32(19-42(31)40)9-10-34-24-48-36(23-46(34)44)12-11-35-21-45-33(22-47(35)48)8-7-30-17-41-29(18-43(30)45)4-3-27-15-37(39(26)16-28)25(1)13-38(27)41/h1-24H
InChIKey=KJWRWEMHJRCQKK-UHFFFAOYSA-N

Aromaticity &nanohoops Steven Bachrach 22 May 2017 No Comments

Progress in DFT development and the density they predict

“Getting the right answer for the right reason” – how important is this principle when it comes to computational chemistry? Medvedev and co-workers argue that when it comes to DFT, trends in functional development have overlooked this maxim in favor of utility.1 Specifically, they note that

There exists an exact functional that yields the exact energy of a system from its exact density.

Over the past two decades a great deal of effort has gone into functional development, mostly in an empirical way done usually to improve energy prediction. This approach has a problem:

[It], however, overlooks the fact that the reproduction of exact energy is not a feature of the exact functional, unless the input electron density is exact as well.

So, these authors have studied functional performance with regards to obtaining proper electron densities. Using CCSD/aug-cc-pwCV5Z as the benchmark, they computed the electron density for a number of neutral and cationic atoms having 2, 4, or 10 electrons. Then, they computed the densities with 128 different functionals of all of the rungs of Jacob’s ladder. They find that accuracy was increasing as new functionals were developed from the 1970s to the early 2000s. Since then, however, newer functionals have tended towards poorer electron densities, even though energy prediction has continued to improve. Medvedev et al argue that the recent trend in DFT development has been towards functionals that are highly parameterized to fit energies with no consideration given to other aspects including the density or constraints of the exact functional.

In the same issue of Science, Hammes-Schiffer comments about this paper.2 She notes some technical issues, most importantly that the benchmark study is for atoms and that molecular densities might be a different issue. But more philosophically (and practically), she points out that for many chemical and biological systems, the energy and structure are of more interest than the density. Depending on where the errors in density occur, these errors may not be of particular relevance in understanding reactivity; i.e., if the errors are largely near the nuclei but the valence region is well described then reactions (transition states) might be treated reasonably well. She proposes that future development of functionals, likely still to be driven by empirical fitting, might include other data to fit to that may better reflect the density, such as dipole moments. This seems like a quite logical and rational step to take next.

A commentary by Korth3 summarizes a number of additional concerns regarding the Medvedev paper. The last concern is the one I find most striking:

Even if there really are (new) problems, it is as unclear as before how they can be overcome…With this in mind, it does not seem unreasonable to compromise on the quality of the atomic densities to improve the description of more relevant properties, such as the energetics of molecules.

Korth concludes with

In the meantime, while theoreticians should not rest until they have the right answer for the right reason, computational chemists and experimentalists will most likely continue to be happy with helpful answers for good reasons.

I do really think this is the correct take-away message: DFT does appear to provide good predictions of a variety of chemical and physical properties, and it will remain a widely utilized tool even if the density that underpins the theory is incorrect. Functional development must continue, and Medvedev et al. remind us of this need.

References

1) Medvedev, M. G.; Bushmarinov, I. S.; Sun, J.; Perdew, J. P.; Lyssenko, K. A., "Density functional theory is straying from the path toward the exact functional." Science 2017, 355, 49-52, DOI: 10.1126/science.aah5975.

2) Hammes-Schiffer, S., "A conundrum for density functional theory." Science 2017, 355, 28-29, DOI: 10.1126/science.aal3442.

3) Korth, M., "Density Functional Theory: Not Quite the Right Answer for the Right Reason Yet." Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2017, 56, 5396-5398, DOI: 10.1002/anie.201701894.

DFT Steven Bachrach 08 May 2017 No Comments

Tetrabenzo[7]circulene

I have discussed the circulenes in a few previous posts. Depending on their size, they can be bowls, flat disks, or saddles. A computational study of [7]circulene noted that C2 structure is slightly higher in energy than the Cs form,1 though the C2 form is found in the x-ray structure.2

Now, Miao and co-workers have synthesized the tetrabenzo[7]circulene 1 and also examined its structure using DFT.3

As with the parent compound, a C2 and Cs form were located at B3LYP/6-31G(d,p), and are shown in Figure 1. The C2 form is 7.6 kcal mol-1 lower in energy than the Cs structure, and the two are separated by a transition state (also shown in Figure 1) with a barrier of 12.2 kcal mol-1. The interconversion of these conformations takes place without going through a planar form. The x-ray structure contains only the C2 structure. It should be noted that the C2 structure is chiral, and racemization would take place by the path: 1-Cs1-Cs1-C2*, where 1-C2* is the enantiomer of 1-C2.

1-C2

1-TS

1-Cs

Figure 1. B3LYP/6-31G(d,p) optimized structures of 1.

References

1) Hatanaka, M., "Puckering Energetics and Optical Activities of [7]Circulene Conformers." J. Phys. Chem. A 2016, 120 (7), 1074-1083, DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpca.5b10543.

2) Yamamoto, K.; Harada, T.; Okamoto, Y.; Chikamatsu, H.; Nakazaki, M.; Kai, Y.; Nakao, T.; Tanaka, M.; Harada, S.; Kasai, N., "Synthesis and molecular structure of [7]circulene." J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1988, 110 (11), 3578-3584, DOI: 10.1021/ja00219a036.

3) Gu, X.; Li, H.; Shan, B.; Liu, Z.; Miao, Q., "Synthesis, Structure, and Properties of Tetrabenzo[7]circulene." Org. Letters 2017, DOI: 10.1021/acs.orglett.7b00714.

InChIs

1: InChI=1S/C44H22/c1-5-13-28-24(9-1)32-19-17-23-18-20-33-25-10-2-6-14-29(25)38-31-16-8-4-12-27(31)35-22-21-34-26-11-3-7-15-30(26)37(28)43-39(32)36(23)40(33)44(38)42(35)41(34)43/h1-22H
InChIKey=KVMXYGAVHDZMNP-UHFFFAOYSA-N

Aromaticity Steven Bachrach 01 May 2017 No Comments