Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38033803›Full record

ArticleACS central science2023

The Intrinsic Barrier Width and Its Role in Chemical Reactivity.

Guanqi Qiu, Peter R Schreiner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ACS central science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Guanqi QiuInstitute of Organic Chemistry, Justus Liebig University, Heinrich-Buff-Ring 17, 35392 Giessen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3818-3896
Peter R SchreinerInstitute of Organic Chemistry, Justus Liebig University, Heinrich-Buff-Ring 17, 35392 Giessen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3608-5515

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chemical reactions are in virtually all cases understood and explained on the basis of depicting the molecular potential energy landscape, i.e., the change in atomic positions vs the free-energy change. With such landscapes, the features of the reaction barriers solely determine chemical reactivities. The Marcus dissection of the barrier height (activation energy) on such a potential into the thermodynamically independent (intrinsic) and the thermodynamically dependent (Bell-Evans-Polanyi) contributions successfully models the interplay of reaction rate and driving force. This has led to the well-known and ubiquitously used reactivity paradigm of "kinetic versus thermodynamic control". However, an analogous dissection concept regarding the barrier width is absent. Here we define and outline the concept of intrinsic barrier width and the driving force effect on the barrier width and report experimental as well as theoretical studies to demonstrate their distinct roles. We present the idea of changing the barrier widths of conformational isomerizations of some simple aromatic carboxylic acids as models and use quantum mechanical tunneling (QMT) half-lives as a read-out for these changes because QMT is particularly sensitive to barrier widths. We demonstrate the distinct roles of the intrinsic and the thermodynamic contributions of the barrier width on QMT half-lives. This sheds light on resolving conflicting trends in chemical reactivities where barrier widths are relevant and allows us to draw some important conclusions about the general relevance of barrier widths, their qualitative definition, and the consequences for more complete descriptions of chemical reactions.

Identifiers

PMID38033803
PMCPMC10683502

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.