Theoretical Calculations on the Mechanism of Hydrogenation of Diphenylacetylene over Pdn (n = 1-4) Clusters

Abstract

Diphenylacetylene (DPA) is a precursor of stilbene and benzil, and reduction of DPA or its derivatives with metallic reagents is both an old and contemporary topic of research. By means of density function theory (DFT) calculations, a detailed investigation of the mechanism of the hydrogenation of DPA over Pd clusters was carried out at the molecular level. The various species structures in the hydrogenation of DPA over Pd clusters were optimized and analyzed. The calculations indicate that the reactions over different Pd clusters share similar reaction mechanisms, and the entire reaction path could be divided into approximately two stages: stage 1: the hydrogenation of DPA to stilbene by the addition of one hydrogen molecule; and stage 2: the hydrogenation of stilbene to the final product diphenylethane (DPE) with the recovery of the catalyst. The Pd₂- and Pd₃-catalyzed systems exhibit the smallest rate-determining step (RDS) energy barrier, and these systems might be the most active and effective catalytic species among the Pd clusters. Although the Pd clusters used in the current work are simple systems, these clusters could eventually provide insights into the specific structure of the Pd catalyst, since Pd and/or clusters and/or nanoparticles could be envisioned as active catalysts in experiments.

Keywords:
palladium-catalyzed; diphenylacetylene; DFT; reaction mechanisms

Introduction

The carbon-carbon triple bond of alkynes is one of the basic functional groups in chemistry, and its reaction belongs to the foundations of organic chemistry.^1-3 In recent years, the physical chemistry and theory of few organic molecules have been studied more deeply than those of acetylene. Acetylene chemistry has undergone a renaissance because acetylene not only is present in molecules on the frontiers of organic chemistry, such as pharmaceutical chemistry and biochemistry, but also serves as a building block or a general intermediate for the synthesis of large numbers of chemicals.^4-6 The development of new synthetic methodologies based on transition metal catalysis has provided impetus to alkyne chemistry.⁷ The partial hydrogenation catalytic reduction of internal alkynes is an efficient method for preparing olefins and alkanes, and metal complex catalysts have been the most effective catalysts for achieving this transformation.^8,9 The methods for the hydrogenation of alkynes provide exciting strategies for the synthesis of complex organic building blocks and attract extensive attention in pharmaceuticals and other valuable chemicals. This type of hydrogenation reaction utilizes homogeneous Ni, Cr, Ru, Rh, Pd, Cu and borate organic catalysts and is known for the reduction of olefins, alkynes, nitriles and ketones. Although hydrogenation reagents are hydrogen activated by transition metal-based catalysts, Pd catalysts require the mildest of conditions and are the most widely used.^10-14

Diphenylacetylene (DPA) is particularly representative of the alkynes, and it can act as a Lewis acid and ligand in organometallic chemistry because of its symmetry and high planarity. Additionally, DPA is a precursor of stilbene and benzil and reduction of DPA or its derivatives with metallic reagents is old and contemporary topic of research; much attention has been focused on metal complexes, such as Pd, Ir, Ag, Rh complexes, etc.,^15-20 as reductants. In the case of the hydrogenation reaction of diphenylacetylene, however, diphenylethylene is formed as a primary product, but 1,2-diphenylethane (DPE) is absent. In addition, with the development of chemistry, some different synthetic methods, such as the reduction of diphenylacetylene to 1,2-diphenylethane, have been discovered. Recent methods for the synthesis of 1,2-diphenylethane have concentrated on the direct reduction of diphenylacetylene, and most of the reported methods require metal complexes. For example, Cravotto and co-workers²¹ reported that the Pd complex can act as a catalyst to generate 1,2-diphenylethane by the reduction of diphenylacetylene. Additionally, Webster and co-workers²² reported that using the Fe^II complex as a catalyst, in 1 equivalent of ⁿBuNH₂ and HBpin, the triple bond was reduced, and the 1,2-diphenylethane was obtained. However, low yield and many byproducts affect the efficient utilization of catalysts in the hydrogenation of diphenylacetylene. A new hydrogenation reaction with complex metal catalysts was reported by Jackowski and co-workers.²⁰ When Cl₂Pd(PPh₃)₂/Me₂Zn was used as the catalyst in the reduction of diphenylacetylene, 1,2-diphenylethane was the only product and was produced in 99% yield. Despite the use of a bimetallic complex in hydrogenation reactions, Cl₂Pd(PPh₃)₂ as precatalyst and Me₂Zn as a reducing agent, Me₂Zn interacts with the Pd^II precatalyst to deliver Cl₂Pd(PPh₃)₂, which is reduced to Pd⁰.²⁰ Therefore, Pd⁰ is an efficient catalyst in the hydrogenation of diphenylacetylene to 1,2-diphenylethane. Although the authors deduced the reaction mechanism by experiments, the details of the transformations and, more importantly, the origins of the observed selectivity still need to be understood at the molecular level, without which the mechanism of the calculations is incomplete. In challenging situations, the preferred mechanism may depend on the reaction conditions and ligands. While experiments can provide sufficient insights, the interpretation of these results is often inconclusive. In such cases, moving to computational chemistry may attain a deeper understanding of specific chemical problems.

In many cases, Pd catalysis has provided a new world of transformations and has made numerous structural parts more accessible. Although the role of Pd may be apparent, there are usually multiple pathways that need to be considered.^14,23-27 With the progress of theoretical methods in recent years, the combination of quantum chemical computations and experiments has made great progress in the development of chemistry. Particularly, the density functional theory (DFT) method^28-33 has been widely used in the study of the mechanisms, molecular interactions, and origins of selectivity in the reactions.

Here, we have employed the DFT method to investigate the mechanism of the reduction reaction at a molecular level. The aim of the present paper is focused on the following aspects: (i) the most feasible step of the whole reaction, including the rate-determining step (RDS); II the effect of the states of the palladium catalysts (Pd-Pd₄) on the hydrogenation reaction (Scheme 1); and (iii) the configuration of the stilbenes (semihydrogenation products). This computational study contributes to the understanding of these hydrogenation reactions at the molecular level and can also provide some important suggestions for new hydrogenation reactions.

Scheme 1
Pd-catalyzed hydrogenation of diphenylacetylene to 1,2-diphenylethane.

Methodology

The previous computational literatures demonstrated that the density functional Minnesota 06 (M06)^34-37 and Becke, 3-parameter, Lee-Yang-Parr (B3LYP)^38,39 methods performed well for catalytic reactions based on the transition metal system.^33,40-45 In the present investigations, the geometrical optimizations of all the intermediates (IM) and transition states (TS) were performed using the M06 and B3LYP methods, respectively. The palladium clusters were optimized before the coordination of DPA, the initial Pd−Pd distances of 1.5 and 3 Å were used in the optimization of Pd agglomerates and the coordinates of palladium atoms of the clusters were relaxed in following optimization. The electronic spin state of the considered Pd_n clusters is the singlet state. The SDD basis set⁴⁶ was used for Pd atom and the 6-311+G(d,p) basis set⁴⁷ was employed for the rest atoms. The solvation effect was considered in the geometry optimization by a self-consistent reaction field (SCRF), in which the polarizable continuum model (PCM) implicit solvent model was employed with tetrahydrofuran (THF) as a solvent.^48-50 All geometries were optimized in vacuum by using PCM model. This model was used for single-point energy calculations based on all of the solvent-phase optimized geometries at a larger basis set (SDD for the Pd atom and 6-311+G(d,p) for other atoms). All DFT calculations were performed with the Gaussian 09⁵¹ series of electronic structure programs. The vibrational frequencies were assessed at the same level of theory as that for the geometrical optimizations, to verify the stationary points as local minima (no imaginary frequencies) or transition states (unique imaginary frequency). Necessarily, using the intrinsic reaction coordinate (IRC) method,⁵² the key transition states were confirmed to be the connection between the corresponding reactant and product. The total cartesian coordinates for all minima point and transition states in the gas-phase by B3LYP and M06 are provided in the Supplementary Information (SI) section.

Results and Discussion

Reaction mechanism

The DFT calculations predicted that the reactions over different Pd clusters share a reaction mechanism similar to that in Scheme 1, and the entire reaction path could be divided into approximately two successive stages: stage 1: the hydrogenation of DPA to stilbene by the addition of one hydrogen molecule; and stage 2: the hydrogenation of stilbene to the final product DPE with the recovery of the catalyst.

Additionally, M06 and B3LYP gave the comparable values with few discrepancies in the optimized geometries, which implies that the present calculation is reasonable for the titled reaction system. To give a concise expression, the following discussion will be based on the Pd₃-catalyst system at the B3LYP(PCM)/6-311+G(d,p), SDD level unless otherwise specified. The detailed information about the optimized structures and energy profile of the hydrogenation of DPA over the Pd, Pd₂ and Pd₄ cluster systems is provided in the SI section.

Stage 1: hydrogenation of DPA to stilbene

The energy profile and the optimized IMs and TSs at the B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p), SDD, are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1
3D models of various species and the energy profile in reaction stage 1 of Pd₃-catalyzed hydrogenation of diphenylacetylene (DPA) system obtained at the M06/6-311+G(d,p), SDD level. Bond lengths are in Å, relative energies are in kcal mol^–1 and imaginary frequencies are in cm^–1.

As shown in Figure 1, the reaction is triggered by the coordination of the alkyne moiety with the Pd atoms with the formation of the Pd₃-DPA complex, and the palladium clusters were optimized before its approximation to DPA. In this complex, the Pd−C distances are calculated to be 1.99-2.14 Å, and the negative Laplacian of electronic densities Ѳr at (3, -1) bonding critical points by atoms in molecule (AIM) analysis⁵³ in Figure 2 indicates the covalent interaction between Pd₃ and DPA, demonstrating that there is a strong interaction between the substrate and the Pd₃ cluster. This result could be enhanced by the lower relative free energy of 54.7 kcal mol^-1 with respect to the separated substance and bare Pd₃ cluster.

Figure 2
Laplacian (∇²ρ) and electronic density (ρ) of selected bond critical points (BCP) for Pd₃-DPA complex were obtained by atoms in molecule (AIM) analysis.

Next, an external H₂ molecule gets close to one Pd-end of the Pd₃-DPA complex and leads to the yield of Pd₃-IM¹ intermediate. In this IM, the H−H bond is slightly enlarged to 0.81 Å, and the Pd−H distances are predicted to be ca. 1.79 Å. The formation of the Pd₃-IM¹ is calculated to be energy-favored by −7.8 kcal mol^-1 from Pd₃-DPA + H₂, indicating that the generation of Pd₃-IM¹ from reactants is non-spontaneous.

Then, the cleavage of the H−H bond and the insertion of one hydrogen atom into the DPA takes place through the three-membered ring transition state (TS¹), leading to the formation of Pd₃-IM². In this species, the three-membered ring is characterized by an elongated C−H bond of 1.66 Å, Pd−C bond of 2.08 Å and Pd−H bond of 1.56 Å. For Pd₃-IM², the C−H distance is calculated to be 1.08 Å, indicating that the migration of hydrogen atom is complete, and the corresponding C−H bond has been formed. In addition, the rest of the alkyne coordinates with the two Pd ends of the Pd₃ cluster with the Pd−C distances of 2.09 Å. The calculations show that the above step has a moderate energy barrier of 26.2 kcal mol^-1.

From the Pd₃-IM², the next hydrogen atom transfers to another side of the alkyne moiety of the DPA via transition state TS², which leads to the formation of Pd₃-IM³. As shown in Figure 1, cis-TS² and trans-TS² are located on the energy profile: the former leads to the stilbene moiety in the E-configuration in the cis-IM³ intermediate, and the latter leads to the Z-configuration in the trans-IM³ intermediate. Each TS² features the four-membered ring transition state with the Pd−Pd bond of ca. 2.70 Å, Pd−C bond of ca. 2.00 Å, C−H bond of ca. 1.50 Å and H−Pd bond of 1.70 Å.

As a result, cis- and trans-IM³ are identified at the end of stage 1 of the reaction mechanism. For each IM³, the C−H distance is calculated to be ca. 1.09 Å, indicating that the migration of the hydrogen atom is finished, and the corresponding C−H bond has been formed. In addition, the alkene that is generated coordinates with the Pd₃ cluster with the Pd−C distances in the range of 2.14-2.15 Å, demonstrating the interaction between the carbon of the phenyl ring and the Pd₃ cluster. As a result, the stilbene adsorbed on the Pd₃ cluster is generated at the end of this reaction state after TS², and the energy barrier of the step via TS² is calculated to be 16.3 kcal mol^-1 for the cis-path and 12.7 kcal mol^-1 for the trans-path.

Here, it should be emphasized that the configuration of the stilbene intermediate is closely dependent on the step via the TS², and therefore the TS² appears to be the stereo-controlling transition state in the reaction stage 1. The B3LYP calculation predicts the energy barrier via the trans-TS² is energy-favored by 3.6 kcal mol^-1 over its competing transition state of cis-TS². The trans-TS² links to the formation of stilbene in the Z-configuration and the cis-TS² to the formation of stilbene in the E-configuration, according to the absolute rate theory and the formula as follows:

(1) $\mathit{trans}:\mathit{cis}=k_{\mathit{trans}}:k_{\mathit{cis}}=\exp \left(-\frac{\Delta G_{\mathit{trans}}^{\cancel{=}}}{\mathrm{RT}}\right):\exp \left(-\frac{\Delta G_{\mathit{cis}}^{\cancel{=}}}{\mathrm{RT}}\right)$

where k is the rate constant, T is the absolute temperature, R is the gas constant, and DG^≠ is the activation Gibbs free energy.

The stereo-selectivity of stilbene is predicted to be Z/ E > 1:99 at 298.15 K indicating that the generation of Z-stilbene might be advantageous in thermodynamics. However, considered the error generated from the DFT calculations, this reason may be not accurate enough to account for the selectivity of cis- and trans-IMs in the experiment.

Stage 2: hydrogenation of stilbene to DPE

In stage 2, the reaction must undergo the hydrogenation from stilbene to DPE over Pd-catalyst with the addition of another H₂ molecule after the reaction stage 1 has been completed. The results are shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3
3D models of various species and the energy profile in reaction stage 2 of Pd₃-catalyzed hydrogenation of diphenylacetylene (DPA) system obtained at the M06/6-311+G(d,p), SDD level. Bond lengths are in Å, relative energies are in kcal mol^–1 and imaginary frequencies are in cm^–1.

In this stage, an external H₂ molecule coordinates to one Pd-end of two Pd₃-IM³ complexes and leads to the yield of cis- or trans-IM⁴ intermediate. In each IM⁴, the H−H bond is slightly enlarged to ca. 0.85-0.86 Å, and the Pd−H distances are calculated to be ca. 1.70 Å. The formation of the cis-IM⁴ is predicted to be energy-favored by 9.7 kcal mol^-1 from the separated cis-IM³ and H₂, and the formation of the trans-IM⁴ is calculated to be favored by 12.0 kcal mol^-1 from the separated trans-IM³ and H₂ in relative energy, indicating that the generation of IM⁴ is spontaneous.

Next, the breakage of the H−H bond and the insertion of one hydrogen atom into the stilbene moiety occur through the four-membered ring transition state (cis- or trans-TS⁴) with the generation of the IM⁵. The four-membered ring is characterized by an elongated C−H bond of 1.66-1.68 Å, Pd−H bond of 1.61-1.62 Å, Pd−C bond of ca. 2.10 Å, and C−C bond of 1.43 Å. For IM⁵, the calculations determine the optimized C−H distance to be 1.09 Å, which implies that the transfer of the hydrogen atom is completed with the formation of the corresponding sp³ carbon. In addition, the rest of the alkene part coordinates the two Pd atom Pd₃ cluster with the Pd−C distances of ca. 2.09 Å. The calculations predict that the above step has a moderate energy barrier of 12.5 kcal mol^-1 in relative energy.

Then, from the IM⁵, the reaction goes through the four-membered ring transition state (TS⁵), leading to the formation of IM⁶. The three-membered ring is composed of a Pd−C bond of 2.13 Å, a C−H bond of 1.73 Å and a H−Pd bond of 1.61 Å. For IM⁶, the C−H distance is calculated to be 1.09 Å, indicating that the migration of the hydrogen atom is completed, and the corresponding C−H bond is formed. In addition, the rest of the alkyne coordinates with the three Pd atom Pd₃ cluster with the Pd−C distances of ca. 2.12 Å. The calculations indicate that the above step has a moderate energy barrier of 13.4 kcal mol^-1.

Finally, the release of DPE from IM⁶ takes place with the recovery of the Pd₃-cluster. This step is predicted to be endothermic by ca. 21.9 kcal mol^-1 without any barrier. As shown in Figures 1 and 3, the entire reaction is clearly favored by 54.7 kcal mol^-1 in Gibbs free energy, and the largest barrier of 26.2 kcal mol^-1 corresponds to the step from the IM¹ ® TS¹, indicating that the first hydrogenation step should be the rate determining step (RDS).

Comparison of Pd-Pd₄ catalyzed reactions

The reaction mechanisms over the Pd-Pd₄ cluster are similar, but the properties of the energy profiles vary: for the Pd-Pd₃ systems, both the M06 and B3LYP calculations predict that the step of IM¹ ® TS¹ is the RDS with the barrier of ca. 22-29 kcal mol^-1 (see SI section), while the RDS of the Pd₄ system turns to the final hydrogen migration step in IM⁵ ® TS⁵ with the giant barrier larger than 33 kcal mol^-1. It is found that B3LYP energies could be considerably underestimated, and this is in accordance with the literature.^54,55 The 3D models of various species and the energy profile are shown in Figures 4 and 5.

Figure 4
3D models of various species and the energy profile in reaction stage 1 of Pd₄-catalyzed hydrogenation of diphenylacetylene (DPA) system obtained at the M06/6-311+G(d,p), SDD level. Bond lengths are in Å, relative energies are in kcal mol^–1 and imaginary frequencies are in cm^–1.

Figure 5
3D models of various species and the energy profile in reaction stage 2 of Pd₄-catalyzed hydrogenation of diphenylacetylene (DPA) system obtained at the M06/6-311+G(d,p), SDD level. Bond lengths are in Å, relative energies are in kcal mol^–1 and imaginary frequencies are in cm^–1.

Analysis of turnover frequency (TOF) in the catalytic cycle

In addition, based on the transition state theory and energetic span model,⁵⁶ we evaluated the theoretical turnover frequency (TOF) of the catalytic cycle via the intermolecular and H-transfer mechanism catalyzed by the Pd_n (n = 1-4) catalyst. In equations 2 and 3,^57-60 the dE (energy span) is the energy difference between the summit and the through of the catalytic cycle. GTDTS and GTDI are defined as the Gibbs free energy of the TOF-determining transition state (TDTS) and the TOF-determining intermediate (TDI), and DG_r is the global free energy of the whole cycle.^56,61

(2) $\mathrm{TOF}\approx \frac{K_{B}T}{h}{e}^{-\delta E/\mathrm{RT}}$

where K_B is Boltzmann’s constant, h is Planck’s constant, T is the absolute temperature, R is the gas constant, and

(3) $\begin{array}{c}\delta E=E\left(\mathrm{TDTS}\right)-E\left(\mathrm{TDI}\right),\hfill \\ \mathrm{if}\mathrm{TDTS}\mathrm{appears}\mathrm{after}\mathrm{TDI}\hfill \end{array}$

(4) $\begin{array}{c}\delta E=E\left(\mathrm{TDTS}\right)-E\left(\mathrm{TDI}\right)+\Delta G_r,\hfill \\ \mathrm{if}\mathrm{TDTS}\mathrm{appears}\mathrm{before}\mathrm{TDI}\hfill \end{array}$

As shown in Table 1, the intermediate IM¹ + H₂ and IM⁵ is predicted to be TDI, and the H-transfer transition states TS¹ and TS⁵ are TDTS for the whole cycle of the hydrogenation reaction. As expected, the TOFs of the catalytic cycles involving Pd_n (n = 1-4) catalyzed H-transfer pathways are significantly higher than that of the intramolecular H-transfer pathways. Moreover, Pd₃ exhibits better catalytic performance when the catalytic reaction occurs along the Pd₃ reaction pathway, with TOF being 0.25 s^-1.

Table 1
Turnover frequency (TOF) of the catalytic cycle for hydrogenation reaction catalyzed by Pd_n (n = 1-4) along four paths

Catalyst	TDI	TDTS	TOF / s-1
Pd	IM1 + H2	TS1	3.45 × 10-5
Pd2	IM1 + H2	TS1	2.14 × 10-1
Pd3	IM1 + H2	TS1	2.46 × 10-1
Pd4	IM5	TS5	8.90 × 10-8

• TDI: TOF-determining intermediate (IM); TDTS: TOF-determining transition states.

Conclusions

The mechanism of the hydrogenation reaction of diphenylacetylene catalyzed by Pd-Pd₄ species was investigated by using DFT method. The entire reaction mechanism in the present investigation is predicted to be composed of two processes: stage 1: the hydrogenation of DPA to stilbene with the addition of one hydrogen molecule via TS¹ and TS²; and stage 2: the hydrogenation of stilbene via TS³ and TS⁴ to the final product DPE with the recovery of the catalyst.

The calculation on the diphenylacetylene system indicates that the hydrogenation could take place in existence of four catalysis of Pd, Pd₂, Pd₃ and Pd₄. For the Pd-Pd₃ systems, both the M06 and B3LYP calculations predict that the step of IM¹ ® TS¹ is the RDS with the barrier of the largest Gibbs energy, and the RDS of the Pd₄ system turns to the step of the final hydrogen-migration step in IM⁵ ® TS⁵ with the giant barrier larger than 33.1 kcal mol^-1. The calculation reproduces the major product E-stilbene intermediate, and exhibits the smallest RDS energy barrier for the Pd₂- and Pd₃-catalyzed system. Therefore, Pd₂- and Pd₃-catalysts might be the most active and effective catalysis species among the four clusters. This computational study is expected to provide a full understanding of this hydrogenation reaction at the molecular level and can also provide some important suggestions for the rational design and synthesis of the new Pd-catalytic hydrogenation reactions.

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by Academy-School Cooperation Project S18H321-Q.

Supplementary Information

The total Cartesian coordinates for all minima point and transition states in the gas phase by B3LYP and M06 are available free of charge at http://jbcs.sbq.org.br as PDF file.

References

• ¹
  Jun, C. H.; Chem. Soc. Rev. 2004, 33, 610.
• ²
  Tobisu, M.; Chatani, N.; Chem. Soc. Rev. 2008, 37, 300.
• ³
  Wang, A.; Jiang, H.; J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 5030.
• ⁴
  Chinchilla, R.; Najera, C.; Chem. Rev. 2014, 114, 1783.
• ⁵
  Stang, P. J.; Diederich, F.; Modern Acetylene Chemistry; VCH: Weinheim, 1995
• ⁶
  Diederich, F.; Stang, P. J.; Tykwinski, R. R.; Acetylene Chemistry; Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, 2005
• ⁷
  Schmidt, E. Y.; Tatarinova, I. V.; Semenova, N. V.; Protsuk, N. I.; Ushakov, I. A.; Trofimov, B. A.; J. Org. Chem 2018, 83, 10272.
• ⁸
  Borodziński, A.; Bond, G. C.; Catal. Rev. 2008, 50, 379.
• ⁹
  Molnár, Á.; Sárkány, A.; Varga, M.; J. Mol. Catal. A: Chem. 2001, 173, 185.
• ¹⁰
  Barrios-Francisco, R.; García, J. J.; Appl. Catal., A 2010, 385, 108.
• ¹¹
  Espinal-Viguri, M.; Neale, S. E.; Coles, N. T.; Macgregor, S. A.; Webster, R. L.; J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2019, 141, 572.
• ¹²
  Shao, Z.; Fu, S.; Wei, M.; Zhou, S.; Liu, Q.; Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2016, 55, 14653.
• ¹³
  Zhou, Q.; Zhang, L.; Meng, W.; Feng, X.; Yang, J.; Du, H.; Org. Lett. 2016, 18, 5189.
• ¹⁴
  Sperger, T.; Sanhueza, I. A.; Kalvet, I.; Schoenebeck, F.; Chem. Rev. 2015, 115, 9532.
• ¹⁵
  Kojima, Y.; Matsuoka, T.; Takahashi, H.; J. Mater. Sci. Lett. 1996, 15, 1543.
• ¹⁶
  Li, S. H.; Li, L. C.; Xu, C. H.; Chin. Chem. Lett 2012, 23, 69.
• ¹⁷
  Manna, S.; Antonchick, A. P.; ChemSusChem 2019, 12, 3094.
• ¹⁸
  Domínguez-Domínguez, S.; Berenguer-Murcia, Á.; Linares-Solano, Á.; Cazorla-Amorós, D.; J. Catal. 2008, 257, 87.
• ¹⁹
  Nishio, R.; Sugiura, M.; Kobayashi, S.; Org. Biomol. Chem. 2006, 4, 992.
• ²⁰
  Maazaoui, R.; Abderrahim, R.; Chemla, F.; Ferreira, F.; Perez-Luna, A.; Jackowski, O.; Org. Lett. 2018, 20, 7544.
• ²¹
  Wu, Z.; Cherkasov, N.; Cravotto, G.; Borretto, E.; Ibhadon, A. O.; Medlock, J.; Bonrath, W.; ChemCatChem 2015, 7, 952.
• ²²
  King, A. K.; Buchard, A.; Mahon M. F.; Webster, R. L.; Chem. - Eur. J. 2015, 21, 15960.
• ²³
  Sameera, W. M. C.; Maseras, F.; Wiley Interdiscip. Rev.: Comput. Mol. Sci. 2012, 2, 375.
• ²⁴
  Bonney, K. J.; Schoenebeck, F.; Chem. Soc. Rev. 2014, 43, 6609.
• ²⁵
  Holder, J. C.; Zou, L.; Marziale, A. N.; Liu, P.; Lan, Y.; Gatti, M.; Kikushima, K.; Houk, K. N.; Stoltz, B. M.; J. Am. Chem. Soc 2013, 135, 14996.
• ²⁶
  Lan, Y.; Houk, K. N.; J. Org. Chem. 2011, 76, 4905.
• ²⁷
  Musaev, D. G.; Figg, T. M.; Kaledin, A. L.; Chem. Soc. Rev. 2014, 43, 5009.
• ²⁸
  Kohn, W.; Sham, L. J.; Phys. Rev. 1965, 140, 1133.
• ²⁹
  Dreizler, R. M.; Gross, E. K. U.; Density Function Theory; Springer: Berlin, 1990
• ³⁰
  Steinmetz, M.; Grimme, S.; ChemistryOpen 2013, 2, 115.
• ³¹
  Koch, W.; Holthausen, M. C.; Kaupp, M.; Angew. Chem 2001, 113, 989.
• ³²
  Dreizler, R. M.; Gross, E. K. U.; Density Functional Approach to Time-Dependent and to Relativistic Systems; Springer: Boston, 1985
• ³³
  Lipshutz, B. H.; Chrisman, W.; Noson, K.; Papa, P.; Sclafani, J. A.; Vivian, R. W.; Keith, J. M.; Tetrahedron 2000, 56, 2779.
• ³⁴
  Zhao, Y.; Truhlar, D.; Theor. Chem. Acc. 2008, 120, 215.
• ³⁵
  Zhao, Y.; Truhlar, D.; Acc. Chem. Res. 2008, 41, 157.
• ³⁶
  Bryantsev, V. S.; Diallo, M. S.; van Duin, A. C. T.; Goddard III, W. A.; J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2009, 5, 1016.
• ³⁷
  Jacquemin, D.; Perpète, E. A.; Ciofini, I.; Adamo, C.; Valero, R.; Zhao, Y.; Truhlar, D. G.; J. Chem. Theory Comput 2010, 6, 2071.
• ³⁸
  Becke, A. D.; J. Chem. Phys. 1993, 98, 5648.
• ³⁹
  Lee, C. T.; Yang, W. T.; Parr, R. G.; Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 1988, 37, 785.
• ⁴⁰
  Shi, S. L.; Xu, L. W.; Oisaki, K.; Kanai, M.; Shibasaki, M.; J. Am. Chem. Soc 2010, 132, 6638.
• ⁴¹
  Liu, H. Y.; Zhang, W.; He, L.; Luo, M. L.; Qin, S.; RSC Adv 2014, 4, 5726.
• ⁴²
  Zhang, W.; Li, W. Y.; Qin, S.; Org. Biomol. Chem 2012, 10, 597.
• ⁴³
  Hong, S.; Huber, S. M.; Gagliardi, L.; Cramer, C. C.; Tolman, W. B.; J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 14190.
• ⁴⁴
  Bar-Nahum, I.; Gupta, A. K.; Huber, S. M.; Ertem, M. Z.; Cramer, C. J.; Tolman, W. B.; J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 2812.
• ⁴⁵
  Cramer, C. J.; Gour, J. R.; Kinal, A.; Wloch, M.; Piecuch, P.; Shahi, A. R. M.; Gagliardi, L.; J. Chem. Phys. A 2008, 112, 3754.
• ⁴⁶
  Igel-Mann, G.; Stoll, H.; Preuss, H.; Mol. Phys. 1988, 65, 1321.
• ⁴⁷
  Frisch, M. J.; Pople, J. A.; Binkley, J. S.; J. Chem. Phys. 1984, 80, 3265.
• ⁴⁸
  Tomasi, J.; Mennucci, B.; Cancès, E.; J. Mol. Struct.: THEOCHEM 1999, 464, 211.
• ⁴⁹
  Barone, V.; Cossi, M.; J. Phys. Chem. A 1998, 102, 1995.
• ⁵⁰
  Cossi, M.; Rega, N.; Scalmani, G.; Barone, V.; J. Comput. Chem. 2003, 24, 669.
• ⁵¹
  Frisch, M. J.; Trucks, G. W.; Schlegel, H. B.; Scuseria, G. E.; Robb, M. A.; Cheeseman, J. R.; Scalmani, G.; Barone, V.; Mennucci, B.; Petersson, G. A.; Nakatsuji, H.; Caricato, M.; Li, X.; Hratchian, H. P.; Izmaylov, A. F.; Bloino, J.; Zheng, G.; Sonnenberg, J. L.; Hada, M.; Ehara, M.; Toyota, K.; Fukuda, R.; Hasegawa, J.; Ishida, M.; Nakajima, T.; Honda, Y.; Kitao, O.; Nakai, H.; Vreven, T.; Montgomery Jr., J. A.; Peralta, J. E.; Ogliaro, F.; Bearpark, M.; Heyd, J. J.; Brothers, E.; Kudin, K. N.; Staroverov, V. N.; Keith, T.; Kobayashi, R.; Normand, J.; Raghavachari, K.; Rendell, A.; Burant, J. C.; Iyengar, S. S.; Tomasi, J.; Cossi, M.; Rega, N.; Millam, J. M.; Klene, M.; Knox, J. E.; Cross, J. B.; Bakken, V.; Adamo, C.; Jaramillo, J.; Gomperts, R.; Stratmann, R. E.; Yazyev, O.; Austin, A. J.; Cammi, R.; Pomelli, C.; Ochterski, J. W.; Martin, R. L.; Morokuma, K.; Zakrzewski, V. G.; Voth, G. A.; Salvador, P.; Dannenberg, J. J.; Dapprich, S.; Daniels, A. D.; Farkas, O.; Foresman, J. B.; Ortiz, J. V.; Cioslowski, J.; Fox, D. J.; Gaussian 09, Revision D.01; Gaussian, Inc., Wallingford, CT, USA, 2013
• ⁵²
  Gonzalez, C.; Schlegel, H. B.; J. Chem. Phys. 1989, 90, 2154.
• ⁵³
  Matta, Ch. F.; Boyd, R. J.; The Quantum Theory of Atoms in Molecules: from Solid State to DNA and Drug Design; Wiley-VCH GmbH & Co. KGaA: Weinheim, 2007.
• ⁵⁴
  de Souza, L. A.; Nogueira, C. A. S.; Lopes, J. F.; dos Santos, H. F.; de Almeida, W. B.; J. Phys. Chem. C 2015, 119, 8394.
• ⁵⁵
  de Souza, L. A.; da Silva, A. M.; dos Santos, H. F.; de Almeida, W. B.; RSC Adv. 2017, 7, 13212.
• ⁵⁶
  Amatore, C.; Jutand, A.; J. Organomet. Chem. 1999, 576, 254.
• ⁵⁷
  Kozuch, S.; Shaik, S.; Acc. Chem. Res. 2011, 44, 101.
• ⁵⁸
  Kozuch, S.; Shaik, S.; J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 3355.
• ⁵⁹
  Kozuch, S.; Shaik, S.; J. Phys. Chem. A 2008, 112, 6032.
• ⁶⁰
  Uhe, A.; Kozuch, S.; Shaik, S.; J. Comput. Chem. 2011, 32, 978.
• ⁶¹
  Qi, T.; Yang, H.-Q.; Whitfield, D. M.; Yu, K.; Hu, C.-W.; J. Phys. Chem. A 2016, 120, 918.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  09 Oct 2020
• Date of issue
  Oct 2020

History

• Received
  23 Dec 2019
• Accepted
  18 June 2020