The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Hydrogen–Hydrogen Bonding in Planar Biphenyl, Predicted by Atoms‐In‐Molecules Theory, Does Not Exist
Abstract
Based on an Atoms‐in‐Molecules (AIM) analysis, Matta et al. (Chem. Eur. J. 2003, 9, 1940) recently claimed evidence for the existence of hydrogen–hydrogen bonding between ortho‐hydrogen atoms, pointing towards each other from adjacent phenyl groups in planar biphenyl. This AIM result is opposed to the classical view that nonbonded steric repulsion between the ortho‐hydrogen atoms is responsible for the higher energy of the planar as compared to the twisted geometry of biphenyl. In the present work, we address the question if hydrogen–hydrogen bonding in biphenyl exists, as suggested by AIM, or not. To this end, we have analyzed the potential energy surface for internal rotation of biphenyl in terms of two interacting phenyl radicals using density functional theory (DFT) at BP86/TZ2P. A detailed analysis of the bonding mechanism and a quantitative bond energy decomposition in the framework of Kohn–Sham DFT show that Pauli (or overlap) repulsion, mainly between CorthoHortho phenyl MOs, prevents biphenyl from being planar and forces it to adopt a twisted equilibrium geometry. Furthermore, a derivative of biphenyl in which all four ortho‐hydrogen atoms have been removed does adopt a planar equilibrium geometry. Thus, our results confirm the classical view of steric repulsion between ortho‐hydrogen atoms in biphenyl and they falsify the hypothesis of hydrogen–hydrogen bonding.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
te Velde, G., Bickelhaupt, F. M., Baerends, E. J., Fonseca Guerra, C., van Gisbergen, S. J. A., Snijders, J. G., & Ziegler, T. (2001) · Journal of Computational Chemistry · doi:10.1002/jcc.1056 · Cited by 10,152
Self-citation
Cited by
What Is the Covalency of Hydrogen Bonding?
Grabowski, S. J. (2011) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr800346f · Cited by 1,285
Weinhold, F. (2012) · Journal of Computational Chemistry · doi:10.1002/jcc.23060 · Cited by 767
The activation strain model of chemical reactivity
van Zeist, W.-J., & Bickelhaupt, F. M. (2010) · Organic & Biomolecular Chemistry · doi:10.1039/b926828f · Cited by 716
Self-citationRemya, K., & Suresh, C. H. (2016) · RSC Advances · doi:10.1039/c6ra06833b · Cited by 53
Metadata
- Authors
- Poater, J., Solà, M., & Bickelhaupt, F. M.
- Venue
- Chemistry – A European Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-03-10
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 2889-2895
- ISSN
- 0947-6539 (ISSN-L)
- 1521-3765
- OpenAlex
- W2129034250
- Cited by
- 345
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 11.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Hydrogen–Hydrogen Bonding in Planar Biphenyl, Predicted by Atoms‐In‐Molecules Theory, Does Not Exist. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/chem.200500850
- The paper
- Poater, J., Solà, M., & Bickelhaupt, F. M. (2006). Hydrogen–Hydrogen Bonding in Planar Biphenyl, Predicted by Atoms‐In‐Molecules Theory, Does Not Exist. Chemistry – A European Journal. https://doi.org/10.1002/chem.200500850
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.