4.7 Article

Energy Decomposition Analysis of Lewis Acid/Base Adducts and Frustrated Lewis Pairs: The Use of EOrb/ESteric Ratios as a Reaction Parameter

Journal

INORGANIC CHEMISTRY
Volume 60, Issue 18, Pages 13797-13805

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.1c00911

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NCSU
  2. National Science Foundation [CHE-1664973]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The primary noncovalent interaction in frustrated Lewis pairs involves lone pair/π interactions between the terminal MX bond and the aromatic C6F5 ring of B(C6F5)3. Energy decomposition analyses show that FLPs and classical adducts can be differentiated by the ratio of covalent-to-noncovalent contributions to the total interaction energy. This study suggests that similar noncovalent interactions exist in both transition-metal and main-group FLPs, especially when using Lewis acids such as B(C6F5)3.
The nature of bonding in classical adducts and frustrated Lewis pairs (FLPs) of oxorhenium and nitridorhenium complexes with B(C6F5)(3) was investigated computationally (B3PW91-D3). These studies have revealed that the primary noncovalent interaction (NCI) in the FLPs involves lone pair/pi interactions between the terminal M X bond and the aromatic C6F5 ring in B(C6F5)(3). Energy decomposition analyses on classical adducts and FLPs reveal that these species can be defined by the ratio (E-Orb/E-Steric) of covalent-to-noncovalent contributions to the total interaction energy, E-Int. This type of analysis reveals that values for FLPs exist in a narrow range (1.2-2.5), with values for adducts significantly outside this range. The application of this method to other main-group combinations of Lewis acids and bases that have been shown to exhibit FLP reactivity yields similar results. These data suggest that similar NCIs are present in both transition-metal and main-group FLPs, especially where Lewis acids such as B(C6F5)(3) are utilized.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available