Aromaticity as a quantitative concept part V: A comparison of semi-empirical methods for the calculation of molecular geometries of heteroaromatic compounds and application of the AM1 and MNDO methods to the calculation of Bird's aromaticity indices

Alan R. Katritzky ∗ , Miroslaw Szafran , Ernst Anders , N. Malhotra, Sana Ullah Chaudry
{"title":"Aromaticity as a quantitative concept part V: A comparison of semi-empirical methods for the calculation of molecular geometries of heteroaromatic compounds and application of the AM1 and MNDO methods to the calculation of Bird's aromaticity indices","authors":"Alan R. Katritzky ∗ ,&nbsp;Miroslaw Szafran ,&nbsp;Ernst Anders ,&nbsp;N. Malhotra,&nbsp;Sana Ullah Chaudry","doi":"10.1016/0898-5529(90)90102-E","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The MINDO/3, MNDO, and AM1 geometries for five and six membered heteroaromatics have been compared with available experimental data and with some ab initio geometries. Geometry optimizations using the AM1 and MNDO methods gave the best results of the semi-empirical methods examined and yielded molecular geometries in good agreement with available experimental bond angles of all types and for C-C, C-N, C-O and C-S bond distances. The AM1 and MNDO calculated that N-N, N-O and C=S bond distances are significantly shorter than experimental values due to a systematic error. In general, AM1 ring geometries provide a reliable estimate for the majority of heteroaromatic compounds.</p><p>The Bird I<sub>6</sub> and I<sub>5</sub> aromaticity indices calculated from semiempirical and <em>ab initio</em> geometries are compared with those calculated from experimental bond lengths. None of these semiempirical theoretical methods are successful for rings when the number of heteroatoms exceed the number of carbon atoms. For other heterocycles, AM1 and <em>ab initio</em> 3–21G basis set give the best results, followed by MNDO and then by MINDO/3. Rings containing carbonyl groups are an exception in that MINDO/3 provides the best 16 estimates.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101214,"journal":{"name":"Tetrahedron Computer Methodology","volume":"3 5","pages":"Pages 247-269"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1990-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0898-5529(90)90102-E","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tetrahedron Computer Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/089855299090102E","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

The MINDO/3, MNDO, and AM1 geometries for five and six membered heteroaromatics have been compared with available experimental data and with some ab initio geometries. Geometry optimizations using the AM1 and MNDO methods gave the best results of the semi-empirical methods examined and yielded molecular geometries in good agreement with available experimental bond angles of all types and for C-C, C-N, C-O and C-S bond distances. The AM1 and MNDO calculated that N-N, N-O and C=S bond distances are significantly shorter than experimental values due to a systematic error. In general, AM1 ring geometries provide a reliable estimate for the majority of heteroaromatic compounds.

The Bird I6 and I5 aromaticity indices calculated from semiempirical and ab initio geometries are compared with those calculated from experimental bond lengths. None of these semiempirical theoretical methods are successful for rings when the number of heteroatoms exceed the number of carbon atoms. For other heterocycles, AM1 and ab initio 3–21G basis set give the best results, followed by MNDO and then by MINDO/3. Rings containing carbonyl groups are an exception in that MINDO/3 provides the best 16 estimates.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
芳香性作为定量概念第五部分:计算杂芳香化合物分子几何形状的半经验方法的比较,以及AM1和MNDO方法在Bird’s芳香性指数计算中的应用
将五元和六元杂芳烃的MINDO/3、MNDO和AM1几何结构与现有实验数据和一些从头计算的几何结构进行了比较。利用AM1和MNDO方法进行的几何优化得到了半经验方法中最好的结果,并且得到的分子几何形状与所有类型的实验键角以及C-C、C-N、C-O和C-S键距离都非常吻合。AM1和MNDO计算出N-N, N-O和C=S键距离由于系统误差而明显短于实验值。一般来说,AM1环的几何形状为大多数杂芳香族化合物提供了可靠的估计。用半经验几何法和从头算几何法计算了Bird I6和I5芳香指数,并与实验键长计算结果进行了比较。当杂原子数超过碳原子数时,这些半经验理论方法都不成功。对于其他杂环,AM1和从头算3 - 21g基组的结果最好,其次是MNDO,最后是MINDO/3。含有羰基的环是一个例外,因为MINDO/3提供了最好的16个估计值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Contributors to this issue Introduction Contributors to this issue Errata Contributors to this issue
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1