Comparison of mechanistic models for correlation of activation energies of liquid‐phase addition of carbon‐centered radicals to terminal olefins

Abstract

The performance of different models for the influence of enthalpy and polar effects on radical additions is compared for the extensive data set from the Fischer group, supplemented by additional data. The best correlations result from the Fischer–Radom (FR) model, but it also contains the largest number of adjustable radical‐dependent parameters not based on physical observables. Updating the literature values of $\Delta _f H$, IP, and EA that are inputs to the FR model led to some deterioration in the quality of the correlations; this is symptomatic of remaining deficiencies in the thermochemical databases. In contrast, the Lalevee–Allonas–Fouassier (LAF) model gives poorer correlation but this is in part compensated because it uses the same inputs but with no adjustable parameters. Hammett‐type models based on polar and radical substituent constants rather than on molecular properties of the reactants perform even more poorly. In all cases, poorer correlation, as judged by increasing sd(ΔE), is accompanied by a systematic bias to over‐predict the lower E values and under‐predict the higher ones. The enthalpy contribution in the FR and LAF models is expressed as a linear Evans–Polanyi dependence of E on ΔH. Replacement by nonlinear Marcus dependences does not significantly improve performance. An attempt to significantly reduce the number of adjustable parameters in the FR model by anchoring them to a base set applicable to all radicals, which is then modulated for spin delocalization based on observable ESR hyperfine constants in the initial and adduct radicals, showed modest success. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Philicity of Acetonyl and Benzoyl Radicals: A Comparative Experimental and Computational Study

“…The good fit of the resonance parameter σ − could indicate that an electron transfer from the radical to the styrene occurs in the transition state, thereby generating partial negative charge on the benzylic moiety. Such a charge transfer is generally connected to radical addition reactions exhibiting polar character –…”

“…Thus, there are many examples of radical addition reactions that show a counterintuitive correlation between the electronic properties of the olefin and the radical . Understanding and predicting the rates of radical additions has long been desired, but even today, the correlation of reaction rates with substituent effects is considered difficult . Although some success has been achieved, sometimes aided by extensive calculations of multiple parameters, general and simple solutions as seen for many non‐radical reactions have not been found.…”

Titania-Promoted Carboxylic Acid Alkylations of Alkenes and Cascade Addition–Cyclizations

“…24 Most likely the resulting adduct radicals 15 will be converted to enolates 16 by electron transfer from the TiO 2 particles. Ready protonation 25 will afford adducts 3 , 7 , etc.…”

“…Literature precedents imply that weakly nucleophilic RXCH 2 • radicals should add rapidly to the electron-deficient double bonds of maleimides (and similar acceptors). 24 Most likely the resulting adduct radicals 15 will be converted to enolates 16 by electron transfer from the TiO 2 particles. Ready protonation 25 will afford adducts 3 , 7 , etc.…”

A tutorial for understanding chemical reactivity through the valence bond approach

“…This principle has been widely used in radical additions to olefins and understandably met with mixed success. [41][42][43] However in HAT reactivity, the BEP principle has been usefully employed by experimentalists 40 to correlate the rate data of e.g. a single abstractor with a series of alkanes of varying BDE C-H .…”