Enthalpy Barriers for Asymmetric S<sub>N</sub>2 Alkyl Cation Transfer Reactions between Neutral and Protonated Alcohols
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Enthalpy barriers for gas phase asymmetric alkyl cation transfer reactions between neutral and protonated alcohols in mixed alcohol systems have been calculated by B3LYP, MP2, and G3(MP2) computational methods. As expected, on the basis of the proton affinities of the alcohols, the enthalpy barrier for transfer of the larger alkyl cation is calculated to be lower than that for transfer of the smaller alkyl cation. A linear relationship between the difference in gas basicity (GB) between the alcohols and the enthalpy barrier is observed for the less favorable alkyl cation transfer reactions. The slope of the regression line is 0.55, and the intercept (at ΔGB = 0) is found to be −22.5 kJ mol -1, which is extremely close to the enthalpy barriers for symmetric alkyl cation transfer. This relationship is discussed in the context of the Hammett relationship. Experiments conducted on the reaction of protonated ethanol with 18 O-labeled methanol established that about 7.8% of the protonated ethyl methyl ether formed was via the less favorable methyl cation transfer. This experimental value agrees well with the 8.5% predicted based upon the calculated difference in energy barriers between ethyl and methyl cation transfer (6.1 kJ mol -1 ). This work shows that in the gas phase, the protonated ether products in mixed alcohol systems are formed via two competing S N 2 reactions and that the efficiency of the less favorable alkyl cation transfer reaction increases as the difference in proton affinity of the two alcohols decreases.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".