Methyl Radical Addition Reaction to Substituted C═C Double Bonds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radical addition reactions have become an indispensable tool for constructing carbon–carbon bonds in organic chemistry. Given the significance of these processes, it is imperative that the underlying rules governing odd electron C–C bond forming processes be better understood. This study explores the fundamental case of methyl radical addition reaction (MRAR) to monosubstituted ethylene derivatives (H 2 C β ═C α HR, with R = H, CHO, and NMe 2 ) using Density Functional Theory at ZORA-(U)OLYP/TZ2P. We quantitatively analyzed the factors governing regioselectivity and substituent effects using the Activation Strain Model and Energy Decomposition Analysis. Regarding regioselectivity, radical addition@β is universally favored over addition@α due to reduction in the buildup of unfavorable Pauli repulsion (Δ E Pauli ) and maximization of orbital interactions (Δ E oi ) with the β-carbon. Substituents modulate reactivity through electronic effects: NMe 2 (a representative electron-donating group) and CHO (a representative electron-withdrawing group) lower activation barriers with respect to the unsubstituted reactions due to improved orbital interactions. Among the substituents, CHO lowers the activation barrier for radical addition more than NMe 2 due to a change in the orbital interaction mechanism. By linking qualitative theories like Frontier Molecular Orbital Theory with detailed computational insights, this work advances the mechanistic understanding of radical addition reactions and provides a physically sound and intuitive basis for understanding these key transformations.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".