Structural and Energetic Aspects of the Protonation of Phenol, Catechol, Resorcinol, and Hydroquinone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The various protonated forms of phenol (1), catechol (2), resorcinol (3), and hydroquinone (4) were explored by ab initio quantum chemical calculations at the MP2/6-31G(d) and B3LYP/6-31G(d) levels. Proton affinities (PA) of 1-4 were calculated by the combined G2(MP2,SVP) method, and their gas-phase basicities were estimated after calculation of the change in entropy on protonation. These theoretical data were compared with the corresponding experimental values determined in a high-pressure mass spectrometer. This comparison confirmed that phenols are essentially carbon bases and that protonation generally occurs in a position para to the hydroxyl group. Resorcinol is the most effective base (PA = 856 kJ mol-1) due to the participation of both oxygen atoms in the stabilization of the protonated form. Since protonation is accompanied by a freezing of the two internal rotations, a significant decrease in entropy is observed. The basicity of catechol (PA = 823 kJ mol-1) is due to the existence of an intramolecular hydrogen bond, which is strengthened upon protonation. The lower basicity of hydroquinone (PA = 808 kJ mol-1) is a consequence of the fact that protonation necessarily occurs in a position ortho to the hydroxyl group. When the previously published data are reconsidered and a corrected protonation entropy is used, a proton affinity value of 820 kJ mol-1 is obtained for phenol.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".