“…Here, two inhibitory processes can be distinguished in general: (a) the competitive IHP adsorption of a corrosive species or the inhibitor and (b) the mechanical OHP blocking film preventing corrosive species to reach the surface of a substrate . So far, the modeling of (b) and its inhibitor–inhibitor and inhibitor–electrolyte interactions has mostly been considered for molecules specifically designed to act as surfactants. − Instead, most computational studies focus on process (a) and model the inhibitor–surface interactions. ,,− Corrosion inhibition efficiency is often exclusively correlated with the electronic properties of a molecule. , Recently, Deng et al introduced 2-amino-4-methylthiazole (2AT-Me) as a potential corrosion inhibitor for zinc galvanized steel and compared it to the structurally related compounds 2-aminothiazole (2AT-H), 2-amino-4- iso -propylmethylthiazole (2AT-iPr), and 2-amino-4- tert -butylthiazole (2AT-tBu) with nearly identical electronic properties (Figure ). It was demonstrated that the corrosion inhibitive performance is strongly related to the varying hydrophobicity of 2AT-R (R = H, Me, iPr, tBu) and, therefore, predominantly dependent on inhibitor–electrolyte interactions.…”