Woodward Hoffmann Rules in Conceptual Density Functional Theory : Initial Hardness Response
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Woodward-Hoffmann rules for pericyclic reactions, a fundamental set of reactivity rules in organic chemistry, are formulated in the language of conceptual density functional theory (DFT). DFT provides an elegant framework to introduce chemical concepts and principles in a quantitative manner, partly because it is formulated without explicit reference to a wave function, on whose symmetry properties the Woodward-Hoffmann [J. Am. Chem. Soc. 87, 395 (1965)] rules are based. We have studied the initial chemical hardness response using a model reaction profile for two prototypical pericyclic reactions, the Diels-Alder cycloaddition of 1,3-butadiene to ethylene and the addition of ethylene to ethylene, both in the singlet ground state and in the first triplet excited state. For the reaction that is thermally allowed but photochemically forbidden, the initial hardness response is positive along the singlet reaction profile. (By contrast, for the triplet reaction profile, a negative hardness response is observed.) For the photochemically allowed, thermally forbidden reaction, the behavior of the chemical hardness along the initial stages of the singlet and triplet reaction profiles is reversed. This constitutes a first step in showing that chemical concepts from DFT can be invoked to explain results that would otherwise require invoking the phase of the wave function.
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 | 0.005 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.002 |
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".