“…Second, we gave a comparison of the most concerned relative energies (RE, relative to NM) of interested species. The data in Table 1 show us that our RE results are comparable with those derived from other high-level calculations: (1) for CH 3 1 NO 2 , our B3LYP/6-31111G(3df,2p) result, 59 kcal/mol, is in excellent agreement of the UCCSD(T)/cc-pVQZ (or CBS)//UB3LYP/6-3111G(3df,2p) and MRCISD(10,10)/(aug)-cc-pVTZ//CASSCF(10,10)/cc-pVDZ results of Zhu and Lin 3 and Nguen et al, 10 58.6 (59.8) and 59.2 kcal/mol, respectively, not more than 1 kcal/mol; 64 and 63 kcal/ mol of RE resulted from our and Nguen et al's 10 CCSD(T)/ccpVTZ calculation agrees well with each other; (2) for trans-CH 3 ONO, it seems our CCSD(T) result is better than our B3LYP result for it is closer to high-level MO calculation results; (3) for trans-CH 2 NOOH, our results, 19 and 22 kcal/mol, are very close to G2MP2 result, 21.4 kcal/mol 15 ; (4) and (5) for two TSs of CH 3 NO 2 to trans-CH 3 ONO and of CH 3 NO 2 to trans-CH 2 NOOH, our results are in accord with other results; (6) considering the RE of all species shown in Table 1, the B3LYP and all high-level MO methods give a same increasing order of RE: CH 3 NO 2 , CH 3 ONO, CH 2 NOOH, CH 3 1 NO 2 , TS (CH 3 NO 2 -trans-CH 2 NOOH), TS(CH 3 NO 2 -trans-CH 3 ONO). It shows that both geometry structures and energies predicted by B3LYP/6-31111G(3df,2p) are comparable with those predicted by the high-level methods.…”