1999
DOI: 10.1021/cr980364y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Face Selection in Addition and Elimination in Sterically Unbiased Systems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
31
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 63 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 210 publications
(261 reference statements)
0
31
0
Order By: Relevance
“…154–159 The larger donor ability of CH bonds compared to that of σ CC bonds is the cornerstone of this model 160. This suggestion stimulated many experimental161–166 and theoretical167–169 studies.…”
Section: Factors Controlling Hyperconjugationmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…154–159 The larger donor ability of CH bonds compared to that of σ CC bonds is the cornerstone of this model 160. This suggestion stimulated many experimental161–166 and theoretical167–169 studies.…”
Section: Factors Controlling Hyperconjugationmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…This TS ‐ a′ structure was found to be 9.9 kcal mol −1 higher in energy than TS ‐ a (see the http://www.wiley-vch.de/contents/jc_2002/2007/z604610_s.pdf). This large energy difference can be explained, at least in part, in terms of hyperconjugative effects, which can also serve as a basis for rationalizing the facial selectivity 13. In all TSs that lead to observed dimers, the Δ‐4,5 bond of one orthoquinol follows an approach anti to the σ C,C bond of the allylic methyl substituent at C6 of the other orthoquinol unit.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other interpretations of facial selectivities have also been reviewed [174][175][176][177][178][179][180]. This asymmetry of the p orbitals, if it occurs along the trajectory of addition, is proposed to be generally involved in facial selection in sterically unbiased systems.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%