We introduce a previously unexplored parameter-halenium affinity (HalA)- as a quantitative descriptor of the bond strengths of various functional groups to halenium ions. The HalA scale ranks potential halenium ion acceptors based on their ability to stabilize a "free halenium ion". Alkenes in particular but other Lewis bases as well, such as amines, amides, carbonyls, and ether oxygen atoms, etc., have been classified on the HalA scale. This indirect approach enables a rapid and straightforward prediction of chemoselectivity for systems involved in halofunctionalization reactions that have multiple nucleophilic sites. The influences of subtle electronic and steric variations, as well as the less predictable anchimeric and stereoelectronic effects, are intrinsically accounted for by HalA computations, providing quantitative assessments beyond simple "chemical intuition". This combined theoretical-experimental approach offers an expeditious means of predicting and identifying unprecedented reactions.
We introduce a previously unexplored parameter-n class="Chemical">halenium affinity (n>n class="Chemical">HalA)- as a quantitative descriptor of the bond strengths of various functional groups to halenium ions. The HalA scale ranks potential halenium ion acceptors based on their ability to stabilize a "free halenium ion". Alkenes in particular but other Lewis bases as well, such as amines, amides, carbonyls, and ether oxygen atoms, etc., have been classified on the HalA scale. This indirect approach enables a rapid and straightforward prediction of chemoselectivity for systems involved in halofunctionalization reactions that have multiple nucleophilic sites. The influences of subtle electronic and steric variations, as well as the less predictable anchimeric and stereoelectronic effects, are intrinsically accounted for by HalA computations, providing quantitative assessments beyond simple "chemical intuition". This combined theoretical-experimental approach offers an expeditious means of predicting and identifying unprecedented reactions.
As a class, n class="Chemical">halenium ion n>n class="Species">donors[1] are electrophilic
reagents that offer access
to complex and useful molecular motifs.[2] Oxidation, addition to π-bonds, halogenation of aromatics,
and activation of heteroatoms are among their core reaction modes.
The electronegativity, bonding flexibility, and delivery reagents
for halogen cations strongly modulate their selectivity. For instance,
some chloreniumdonors are effective alcohol oxidants,[3] whereas suitably chosen iodenium reagents achieve mild
activations to form selected glycosidic bonds without oxidation of
alcoholic functionalities.[4] The key to
this diversity of reactivity lies in the variable interactions of
halenium ions with different functional groups.
Electrophilic
activation of n class="Chemical">alkenes via n>n class="Chemical">halenium ion attack has
been extensively studied for its ability to forge C–C, C–O,
C–N, and C–X bonds. The past decade has witnessed explosive
growth, especially in the field of stereoselective halofunctionalization
of alkenes.[5] Despite this rapid expansion
and great synthetic utility, the field is still in its infancy and
has yet to witness benchmarks analogous in generality and utility
to asymmetric epoxidations, dihydroxylations, aminohydroxylations,
hydrogenations, cyclopropanations, hydrometalations, oxidative cleavage,
and aziridinations, among others.[6] Several
studies have probed the mechanistic underpinnings of halenium ion
reactions,[5a,7] but state of the art halofunctionalizations
still rely on trial-and-error approaches to reaction discovery and
development/optimization.
To expedite discovery of new reactions
in this area, an organizing
framework is needed. Reflecting on our own synthetic[8] and mechanistic[9] ventures, we
note the parallels between protonation and pan class="Chemical">halogenation of alkenes.
The field would be well served by a scale like the familiar pKa tables, to classify and order the halenium
ion affinities of various functional groups. Herein we present such
a scale, computationally derived but validated by experiments, that
quantitatively predicts not only the interactions of halenium ions
with various Lewis base acceptors but also the processes that ensue
after the capture of halenium ion by a substrate molecule.
We
begin by addressing a question that is fundamental to all n class="Chemical">alkene
n>n class="Chemical">halogenation reactions: How easily does a given alkene capture a halenium
ion? More specifically, how can we quantify the propensity
of an alkene to undergo halogenation using reliable and predictable
means? We approached this question using theoretical means by comparing
protonation and halogenation chemistry. While there is ample literature
precedent for determination of proton affinities,
an analogous approach with halenium ions (perhaps surprisingly) finds
no such precedence. In analogy to ab initio derived proton affinities
(PA),[10] we have developed
a scale of HalA with the aid of experiments and theoretical
calculations. We have developed the HalA scale with
the aid of experiments and theoretical calculations. For a wide range
of halenium acceptors, HalA serves as a ruler to
predict the relative ease of electrophilic halogenation.
We
define the n class="Chemical">HalA value for a given Lewis base
(:LB) as the DFT[11] calculated energy change
upon attachment of a n>n class="Chemical">halenium ion (X+). The B3LYP/6-31G*
theoretical method was chosen largely based on its popularity, low
cost, wide availability, and success in relation to our experimental
studies. Likewise, the use of the SM8 solvation model[11f,12] and LANL2DZ pseudopotential[11h] and basis
set for iodine were default but effective choices available in the
Spartan[11i] software package.
The
acceptor fragment may be neutral or anionic (i.e., the X–LB
complex is cationic or neutral), leading to two distinct cases:The pan class="Chemical">HalA values in kcal/mol are derived at T = 298.15 K (unless noted otherwise) as in eqs 1 and 2:where ΔE(elec) = E(electronic)(X–LB adduct)
– [E(electronic)(:LB) + E(electronic) (X+)]; zero point energy
change ΔZPE = ZPE(X–LB adduct) – ZPE(:LB); ΔE′(vib) = E′(vib)(X–LB adduct) – E′(vib)(:LB), i.e., difference in temperature dependence of vibrational
energy; N is Avogadro’s number, h is Planck’s constant, and ν is the ith vibrational frequency. Finally,
the (5/2)RT quantity accounts for translational degrees
of freedom and the ideal gas value for the change from two particles
to one. The energy used for the free pan class="Chemical">halenium ion is the value calculated
for its (6-electron, s2p4) triplet ground state.[13]
Table 1 shows an
illustrative set of n class="Chemical">HalA values for n>n class="Chemical">styrenes, taken
from this study’s
list of over 500 halenium acceptors with various functional groups
(see Supporting Information); for reference,
Table 1 lists absolute HalA values for styrene. As expected, for a given substrate, HalA drops with decreasing halogen electronegativity. Likewise,
methyl substitution on styrene (entries 2–4) increases HalA via stabilization of the haloalkylcarbenium ion. Though
these variations are qualitatively predictable, the HalA computations place them on a quantitative basis. Interestingly,
an insightful and counterintuitive result was obtained by comparison
of HalA (F) of β-methylstyrenes (entries 3
and 4, Table 1). In agreement with reports
by Sauers[14] and our previous findings for
chlorenium ion,[9a] the HalA predictions for bromenium and iodenium affinities of (E)- and (Z)-β-methylstyrene also find an open
carbocation minimum (see Figure 1). Evidence
for this comes from the lengthened C(benzylic)–X bond distance
computed for Br and I (as seen earlier for Cl), and a relatively short
length for the C(homobenzylic)–X bond, which is close to the
expected normal bond length for each system. Although the optimized
structures do find the C–X bond aligned with the benzylic cation’s
empty 2p orbital, the <3.5 kcal/mol barrier to −C(CH3)HX rotation reflects no significant preference for bridging.[9a,14] This result explains the higher HalA (Cl, Br, and
I) values for the E-isomer as compared to its sterically
congested Z-analogue (where such an alignment of
C–X bond is skewed due to allylic strain).
Table 1
Theoretically Estimated Relative HalA (Gas Phase)
and PA for Some Illustrative
Styrylic Systemsc
B3LYP/6-31G*.
B3LYP/6-31G*/LANL2DZ.
Numbers in parentheses are absolute HalA and PA values for styrene in kcal/mol.
Figure 1
Geometry minimized structures of (E)- and (Z)-β-methylstyrene upon
treatment with different halenium
ions. B3LYP/6-31G* for HalA (F, Cl, and Br). B3LYP/6-31G*/LANL2DZ
for HalA (I).
B3LYP/6-31G*.B3LYP/6-31G*/LANL2DZ.Numbers in parentheses are absolute n class="Chemical">HalA and n>n class="Chemical">PA values for styrene in kcal/mol.
Geometry minimized structures of n class="Chemical">(E)- and (Z)-β-n>n class="Chemical">methylstyrene upon
treatment with different halenium
ions. B3LYP/6-31G* for HalA (F, Cl, and Br). B3LYP/6-31G*/LANL2DZ
for HalA (I).
As often occurs among n class="Chemical">halogens, n>n class="Chemical">fluorine is unique in its
behavior.
The HalA (F) computations for the β-methylstyrenes
find affinities of 303.3 kcal/mol for the E-isomer
and 306.2 kcal/mol for the Z-isomer (ΔHalA = 2.9 kcal/mol in favor of Z-isomer).
A closer inspection of the minimized models reveals that, regardless
of initial geometry, (E)- and (Z)-β-methylstyrene gives the same 1-fluoromethyl-carbenium ion
with the C–F bond orthogonal to the benzylic cation’s
empty 2p orbital. This stark difference reflects the reluctancy of
the C–F bond to donate into the adjacent empty 2p orbital (owing
to the fluorine atom’s high electronegativity), which in turn
forces the C–C bond to be aligned with the empty orbital. Thus,
the difference in HalA (F) values for E- and Z-isomers arises only from their differing
allylic strain that is relieved upon formation of the common fluoromethyl
carbenium ion intermediate.[15] As the halogens’
electronegativity decreases from F to I, the tendency of the C–X
bond to align with the empty 2p orbital rises as shown by the calculated
(∠X–C–C+) bond angles. Thus, though
the charge (+1) is the same for each intermediate, the HalA analyses of these four styrenic acceptors serve to highlight the
variations among the interaction modes of halenium ions.
Comparing
n class="Chemical">halenium ions as electrophiles suggests reference to
the most familiar electrophile: the proton. Is n>n class="Chemical">HalA simply a rehash of the familiar proton affinity (PA) scale? Clearly not. Very different conformational preferences are
seen for analogous acceptor–proton vs acceptor–halenium
ion complexes, with the energetic orderings even inverted in some
cases. For instance, as seen in Table 1, and
earlier pointed out by Kafafi and Liebman,[16] the (E) and (Z) analogues of β-methylstyrene
(entries 3 and 4) have lower PA values than styrene
itself. Evidently, the stabilizing electron donation by the β-methyl
groups is more significant in the starting olefin than in the cation
formed by proton capture. In contrast, all three methylstyrene isomers
show higher HalA values than the parent styrene.
Thus, the PA scale is distinct from HalA. Furthermore, as Table 1 shows, significant
differences are seen among the halogens, due to variations in their
size, electronegativity, and polarizability. More HalA trends based on ring strain, orbital ovelap contributions, donation
effects, and other secondary interactions are shown in the Supporting Information (S6–S11).
In order to determine how well experimental results agree with
the theoretically predicted n class="Chemical">HalA values, we initiated
studies on n>n class="Chemical">N-halopyridinium salts, simple systems
where halenium affinity can be easily quantified via 1H
NMR. These salts have been well characterized and reported as potent
halenium sources. The corresponding bromenium and iodenium salts are
stable even at room temperature,[17] and
the chlorenium analogues, though unstable to isolation, have been
characterized and observed via ESI studies.[18] Substituted pyridines (1) were chosen as halenium acceptors
for preliminary 1H NMR studies (see Figure 2). Treatment of 1 (acceptor) with chlorenium
sources (Cl+ donors) forms the chloropyridinium ion (1-Cl) with expulsion of the donor counterion. For such a transfer
of halenium ion to ensue, the HalA (Cl) of 1 should be higher than that of the corresponding donor counterion.
Figure 2
Theoretically
estimated relativeHalA values for
pyridine 1a in comparison to the counterions
of commonly employed chlorenium sources (B3LYP/6-31G*/SM8 acetone).
Theoretically
estimated relativen class="Chemical">HalA values for
n>n class="Chemical">pyridine 1a in comparison to the counterions
of commonly employed chlorenium sources (B3LYP/6-31G*/SM8acetone).
Figure 2 depicts the theoretical n class="Chemical">HalA (Cl) values for counterions
of commonly employed n>n class="Chemical">chlorenium
sources in comparison to 1a. Based on these estimates,
the equilibrium for reaction (i) should favor the reactant side as
the anions A–C have a significantly
higher HalA than 1a. Furthermore, based
on the calculated HalA for the least nucleophilic
anion D, the chlorenium ion is probably shared (but not
completely transferred) between 1a and anion D. To verify these predictions, 1a was treated with the
corresponding halenium sources and the interactions were assessed
via the downfield 1H NMR shift of the C3-H resonance.
As a reference point to assess the extent of n class="Chemical">halenium ion transfer,
we referred to the observed chemical shift difference between the
free base-1a (C3-H at 6.82 ppm) and its protonated salt 1a-H[19] (C3-H at 7.66 ppm) in n>n class="Chemical">acetone-d6 (Δppm = 0.84) at room temperature. As
with the protonation, to ensure the formation of 1a-Cl,
chlorodiethylsulfonium antimony(V) hexachloride (CDSC)[20] proved to be the most effective chlorenium ion
source. The resulting chloropyridinium 1a-Cl displayed
a downfield shift of C3-H at 7.69 ppm (Δppm = 0.87). Figure 3 shows the experimental 1H NMR spectra
of 1a upon treatment with stoichiometric amounts of different
chlorenium ion sources (spectra b–f). Spectra b–d clearly
show that pyridine 1a with a HalA (Cl)
= 148.2 kcal/mol is incapable of abstracting a chlorenium ion from
commonly employed imide based chloreniumdonors (such as NCS, DCDMH,
and NCP) whose counterions have higher HalA(Cl) values
(i.e., >148.2 kcal/mol). Even TCCA, the most potent chlorenium
source
among the imide based chloreniumdonors, results in only a 0.1 ppm
downfield shift of C3-H of 1a indicating halogen bonding
(tight van der Waals complex) rather than complete chlorenium ion
transfer (see spectrum e).[21] These experimental
results compliment the theoretical HalA predictions.
Figure 3
Overlay
of 1H NMR (500 MHz, acetone-d6) spectra (a–f). Spectrum a represents a section
of 1H NMR displaying the C3-H of 1a, whereas
overlay of spectra b–f shows the effects of treatment of 1a with different chlorenium sources: NCS (N-chlorosuccinimide), DCDMH (1,3-dichloro-5,5-dimethylhydantoin),
NCP (N-chlorophthalimide), TCCA (trichloroisocyanuric
acid), CDSC (chlorodiethylsulfonium antimony(VI) chloride).
Overlay
of n class="Chemical">1H NMR (500 MHz, acetone-d6) spectra (a–f). Spectrum a represents a section
of 1H NMR displaying the C3-H of 1a, whereas
overlay of spectra b–f shows the effects of treatment of 1a with different chlorenium sources: NCS (N-chlorosuccinimide), DCDMH (1,3-dichloro-5,5-dimethylhydantoin),
NCP (N-chlorophthalimide), TCCA (trichloroisocyanuric
acid), CDSC (chlorodiethylsulfonium antimony(VI) chloride).
Since reaction of neutral species
to form ionic products would
always be energetically uphill in organic solvent, transfer of n class="Chemical">chlorenium
ion to 1a calls for the use of a cationic n>n class="Chemical">chlorenium
reagent (see reaction (ii), Figure 2). With
this aim, CDSC, whose conjugate leaving group has a lower HalA (Cl) value (161.3 kcal/mol, gas phase) than 1a, was employed.[22] Addition of 1.0 equiv
of this reagent to 1a effects the formation of 1a-Cl as indicated by the 0.9 ppm downfield shift of C3-H
(spectrum f), after a complete transfer of the chlorenium ion.[23]
Apart from 1a, several substituted
n class="Chemical">pyridines with
varying electronic and steric profiles were subjected to similar analysis
using n>n class="Chemical">fluorenium, chlorenium, bromenium, and iodenium sources to further
evaluate HalA estimations (see Supporting Information). In all these cases the formation
of a 1:1 complex of Lewis base:halenium ion was confirmed via 1H NMR analysis; the chemical shift of C3-H of 1a-Cl (spectrum f) remained unchanged upon addition of superstoichiometric
quantities of halenium source (see plot in Figure 4, dashed box).
Figure 4
Spectra a–f depicts 1H NMR data for
titration
of 1a with CDSC. The plot below shows change in chemical
shift of C3-H of 1a upon titration with different halenium
sources. CDSC (chlorodiethylsulfonium antimony(VI) chloride), BDSB
(bromodiethylsulfonium antimony(VI) halide), IDSI (iododiethylsulfonium
antimony(VI) halide), XtF (Xtalfluor-E).
Spectra a–f depicts n class="Chemical">1H NMR data for
titration
of 1a with CDSC. The plot below shows change in chemical
shift of C3-H of 1a upon titration with different halenium
sources. CDSC (chlorodiethylsulfonium antimony(VI) chloride), BDSB
(bromodiethylsulfonium antimony(VI) halide), IDSI (iododiethylsulfonium
antimony(VI) halide), XtF (Xtalfluor-E).
To rigorously validate n class="Chemical">HalA assessments
on a quantitative
scale, we resorted to equilibrium studies of n>n class="Chemical">chloropyridinium salts.
Quantitative HalA determination via 1H
NMR analyses was complicated by the tendency of N-halopyridinium ion 1a-Cl to undergo dimerization[24] with the free base 1a when subjected
to substoichiometric amounts of halenium source.[17a] Treatment of 1a with 0.5 equiv of BDSB (or
IDSI) in CDCl3 displayed a downfield shift of C3-H to 7.2
ppm. The extent of this shift is in accordance with the reported halogenated
dimers of 1a.[17d] Figure 4 displays the plot for the observed 1H NMR chemical shift (average of 1a and 1a-X) for C3-H when 1a was titrated with different halenium
sources (see plot). As seen from the overlay of 1H NMR
spectra a–f (Figure 4), due to rapid
exchange and possible dimerization, 1a and 1a-Cl could not be observed as individual species on the NMR time scale.
To overcome this limitation, pyridines 1b and 1c were used for equilibrium studies of 1:1 complexes with CDSC as
a chlorenium source. The bulky t-butyl substituents
in the ortho positions efficiently inhibit the dimerization as well
as rapid intermolecular transfer of halenium ions. As a consequence,
the chlorinated pyridinium (1c-Cl) and the free base
(1c) were observed as distinct species at −30
°C via 1H NMR under substoichiometric amounts of the
halogenating reagent (see Figure 5a).
Figure 5
(a) Partial
chlorination of 1c using 0.5 equiv of
CDSC leads to distinctly observable species 1c and 1c-Cl at −30 °C by 1H NMR (500 MHz).
(b) Competition study between 1b and 1c in
acetone-d6 at −90 °C as quantified
by 1H NMR.
(a) n class="Chemical">Partial
chlorination of 1c using 0.5 equiv of
CDSC leads to distinctly observable species 1c and 1c-Cl at −30 °C by 1H NMR (500 MHz).
(b) Competition study between 1b and 1c in
acetone-d6 at −90 °C as quantified
by 1H NMR.
Figure 5b displays a competition experiment
between the two n class="Chemical">pyridines 1b and 1c, which
have similar electronic and steric profiles. As anticipan>ted, the gas
phase n>n class="Chemical">HalA values predict 1c to have
a slightly increased Lewis basicity as a result of the 4-Me substituent
(ΔHalA = 2.6 kcal/mol). For a better quantitative
representation, an SM8 model[12] for simulated
acetone was applied which attenuated the difference in their HalA values to 1.1 kcal/mol (Figure 5b). When an equimolar mixture of 1b and 1c was treated with 1.0 equiv of CDSC, an equilibrium mixture of 1c-Cl and 1b-Cl in ∼7:1 ratio was observed
by 1H NMR. The experimental result is in good agreement
with the theoretical HalA predictions (ΔHalA = 1.1 kcal/mol; predicting a 7:1 ratio). This study
not only validates quantification via HalA but also
signifies its importance in reliably predicting the outcome of reactions
involving subtle steric and electronic changes.
In NMR studies
of equilibria/competitions for n class="Chemical">halenium ions between
n>n class="Chemical">pyridine 1b and a series of substituted pyridines (1a–g, Figure 6),
the trend of relative halenium affinities (theoretical) was found
to parallel the equilibrium ratios of the competing Lewis bases (experimental),
as elucidated by 1H NMR.
Figure 6
Comparison of ΔHalA (Cl) (B3LYP/6-31G*/SM8)
with experimental results of equilibrium studies between 1c-Cl (prepared in situ using 1.0 equiv of CDSC) in the presence of
1.0 equiv of pyridines 1b–g. The
sigmoidal curve fit (R2 = 0.974) is derived
from the Henderson–Hasselbalch equation.
Comparison of Δn class="Chemical">HalA (Cl) (B3LYP/6-31G*/n>n class="Chemical">SM8)
with experimental results of equilibrium studies between 1c-Cl (prepared in situ using 1.0 equiv of CDSC) in the presence of
1.0 equiv of pyridines 1b–g. The
sigmoidal curve fit (R2 = 0.974) is derived
from the Henderson–Hasselbalch equation.
To explore the practical use of n class="Chemical">HalA, we
applied
it as a mechanistic tool to predict the stereo-, regio-, and chemoselectivity
of electrophilic n>n class="Chemical">alkene halogenations. The following examples were
chosen for proof-of-principle studies. As shown in Figure 7, a Friedel–Crafts reaction of electron rich
arenes is initiated via chlorenium ion activation of a pendant alkene.
Substrate 2 with a 4-MeO-C6H4 substituent
cleanly affords the desired cyclized product (±)-3 upon treatment with DCDMH (Figure 7a). Under
identical conditions, substrate 4 with the significantly
more electron rich aromatic ring undergoes exclusively electrophilic
aromatic substitution yielding product 5. This chemoselectivity
is readily predicted by HalA values. The nucleophilic
aryl carbon of substrate 2 is predicted to have ∼14
kcal/mol lower halenium affinity than the olefin
(HalA values were calculated on truncated systems,
see 6 vs 7, Figure 7b). The aryl ring of 4 on the other hand has about 2.2
kcal/mol higher halenium affinity than the olefin
(see 6 vs 8, Figure 7b) despite the steric demand associated with the formation of the
pentasubstituted aryl core of 5. Hence, the observed
chemoselectivity may not be easily predicted or quantified. The HalA values additionally serve to quantify this selectivity and thereby enable such predictions with a greater
level of confidence.
Figure 7
(a) Example of two reactions under identical conditions
with different
chemoselectivity. (b) HalA (Cl) values (B3LYP/6-31G*)
for the reactive components of 2 and 4.
(a) Example of two reactions under identical conditions
with different
chemoselectivity. (b) pan class="Chemical">HalA (Cl) values (B3LYP/6-31G*)
for the reactive components of 2 and 4.
The next reaction represents an
example where chemoselectivity
prediction (either qualitative or quantitative) may be much less intuitive,
with guesswork easily leading to the incorrect prediction. The treatment
of n class="Chemical">diene 9 with a n>n class="Chemical">chlorenium source affords 10 as the major product (Figure 8a).[25] The chlorination of the 1,1-disubstituted olefin
followed by a nucleophilic attack on the resulting chlorocarbenium
ion by the trans-olefin is necessary for the formation
of the observed product. The HalA (Cl) values for
α- and β-methylstyrene (13 and 14) reveal a 4.5 kcal/mol higher halenium affinity for α-methylstyrene
(capable of forming a 3° carbenium). Interestingly, inclusion
of the electron withdrawing N-sulfonyl group to better
represent the structure of diene 9 greatly attenuates
the difference in HalA values for the truncated structures 15 and 16 (ΔHalA = 0.2
kcal/mol). Notably, the counterintuitive increase in individual HalA (Cl) values with the introduction of the N-methyl sulfonamide results from anchimeric assistance of the neighboring
sulfonamide that overrides any inductively deactivating effects (Figure 8c). The S–O bond of the N-sulfonyl group assists the stabilization of the chloromethyl carbenium
ion generated from α- and β-methylstyrene. This extended
delocalization (internal solvation) in the cationic
intermediates 15-Cl and 16-Cl is responsible
for the higher halenium affinity of 15 and 16 over 13 and 14, which lack the N-sulfonyl tether (also see Figure 1). From a practical viewpoint, this small difference suggests negligible
selectivity between the two olefinic moieties in these “truncated”
models. However, a detailed Boltzmann gated conformational search
of the diene substrate 9 (for calculations, the N-Ms variant was employed instead of N-Ts),
followed by HalA evaluation for the lowest energy
conformers of the two possible chlorocarbenium ions, predicts the
experimental outcome to be favored by 1.6 kcal/mol over chlorination
of the trans-β-methyl styryl moiety. Moreover,
the anichimeric assistance of the olefinic moiety of trans-β-methyl styryl substituent, as shown in intermediate 11 (Figure 8a), is energetically preferred
over the anchimeric assistance of the S–O bond from the N-Ms group by 2.3 kcal/mol. This example underscores the
utility of the HalA method for the accurate prediction
of chemoselectivity in alkenehalogenation reactions. The experimental
confirmation of the theoretically predicted chemoselectivity suggests
that even small energetic preferences (≤2 kcal/mol) can be
reliably distinguished with HalA values.
Figure 8
(a) Chlorocyclization
of diene 9 to 10 is predicted by the higher HalA (Cl) of the 1,1-disubstituted
olefin. Intermediate 11 is the computationally assessed
outcome upon geometry minimization of 9 with chlorenium
ion (B3LYP/6-31G*). (b) HalA (Cl) values for the
reactive components in the cyclization of 9, illustrating
the effect of N-Ms substitution. (c) Anchimeric assistance
of the sulfonyl group toward stabilization of the chlorocarbenium
ion 15-Cl and 16-Cl as predicted by HalA calculations.
(a) Chlorocyclization
of n class="Chemical">diene 9 to 10 is predicted by the higher n>n class="Chemical">HalA (Cl) of the 1,1-disubstituted
olefin. Intermediate 11 is the computationally assessed
outcome upon geometry minimization of 9 with chlorenium
ion (B3LYP/6-31G*). (b) HalA (Cl) values for the
reactive components in the cyclization of 9, illustrating
the effect of N-Ms substitution. (c) Anchimeric assistance
of the sulfonyl group toward stabilization of the chlorocarbenium
ion 15-Cl and 16-Cl as predicted by HalA calculations.
Qualitative reactivity ranking of potential n class="Chemical">halogen attack
sites
using n>n class="Chemical">HalA computations can be made using the HalA table (Supporting Information) whereas quantitative comparison of affinities can be established
by computing the full structures using appropriate solvation models.
Figure 9 provides the HalA (Cl) scale for various functional groups to allow a qualitative
comparison. As shown in Figure 9, functional
groups (acceptors) that feature extended conjugation with the substituents
attached span a larger range of HalA. For instance,
alkenes, alkynes, amines, aromatic compounds, etc., whose HOMO can
be easily perturbed by their substituents, display a wider range of HalA values in comparison to epoxides or alcohols where
the attached substituents can only exert a weaker inductive effect.
A comparison of halenium affinities can (a) facilitate rational selection
of compatible nucleophiles (especially when the nucleophilic atom
is embedded within motifs that have similar steric/electronic profiles);
(b) account for the modulation of HalA values of
alkenes by the anchimeric assistance of neighboring functionalities
(this aspect underscores the importance of quantitatively evaluating HalA values on full structures rather than on truncated
models; furthermore, subtle electronic perturbations leading to modulations
of HalA values are also accounted for in the calculations);
and (c) accurately predict chemoselectivity, aiding in the development
of halenium initiated cascade/Domino reactions.
Figure 9
HalA (Cl) scale based on theoretical estimates
of over 500 chlorenium ion acceptors evaluated at the B3LYP/6-31G*
(gas phase) level of theory.
pan class="Chemical">HalA (Cl) scale based on theoretical estimates
of over 500 pan class="Chemical">chlorenium ion acceptors evaluated at the B3LYP/6-31G*
(gas phase) level of theory.
These studies highlight the pan class="Chemical">HalA scale’s
use as a design/predictive tool in a field heretofore dependent on
trial-and-error approaches for reaction discovery. Like the pKa scale, pan class="Chemical">halenium affinity is
a thermodynamic quantity and may not work to predict kinetically determined
reaction outcomes. For such problems, more complete structural and
energetic analyses of reaction paths and transition states[26] would be necessary.
The scope of “affinity
tools”, such as n class="Chemical">HalA, that broadly predict
reaction chemoselectivities is certainly not
limited exclusively to n>n class="Chemical">alkene halogenation reactions. Any electrophilic
species (such as sulfenium, selenium, oxenium ions) capable of activating
Lewis basic functionalities (such as olefins, alkynes, allenes, amines,
etc.) can be efficiently parametrized on a similar scale to expedite
the development of electrophilic functionalization reactions in general.
These studies are ongoing and will be the subject of future disclosures.
Authors: Aleksandr V Marenich; Ryan M Olson; Casey P Kelly; Christopher J Cramer; Donald G Truhlar Journal: J Chem Theory Comput Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 6.006
Authors: Mary C Andorfer; Jonathan E Grob; Christine E Hajdin; Julia R Chael; Piro Siuti; Jeremiah Lilly; Kian L Tan; Jared C Lewis Journal: ACS Catal Date: 2017-01-31 Impact factor: 13.084
Authors: Brian F Fisher; Harrison M Snodgrass; Krysten A Jones; Mary C Andorfer; Jared C Lewis Journal: ACS Cent Sci Date: 2019-10-24 Impact factor: 14.553