Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 744

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Predicting Hydrogen-Bond Strengths from Acid−Base Molecular Properties. The p Ka Slide Rule: Toward the Solution of a Long-Lasting Problem

Gilli, Paola, Pretto, Loretta, Bertolasi, Valerio, Gilli, Gastone·2009·Accounts of Chemical Research

Abstract

Unlike normal chemical bonds, hydrogen bonds (H-bonds) characteristically feature binding energies and contact distances that do not simply depend on the donor (D) and acceptor (:A) nature. Instead, their chemical context can lead to large variations even for a same donor-acceptor couple. As a striking example, the weak HO-H...OH(2) bond in neutral water changes, in acidic or basic medium, to the 6-fold stronger and 15% shorter [H(2)O...H...OH(2)](+) or [HO...H...OH](-) bonds. This surprising behavior, sometimes called the H-bond puzzle, practically prevents prediction of H-bond strengths from the properties of the interacting molecules. Explaining this puzzle has been the main research interest of our laboratory in the last 20 years. Our first contribution was the proposal of RAHB (resonance-assisted H-bond), a new type of strong H-bond where donor and acceptor are linked by a short pi-conjugated fragment. The RAHB discovery prompted new studies on strong H-bonds, finally leading to a general H-bond classification in six classes, called the six chemical leitmotifs, four of which include all known types of strong bonds. These studies attested to the covalent nature of the strong H-bond showing, by a formal valence-bond treatment, that weak H-bonds are basically electrostatic while stronger ones are mixtures of electrostatic and covalent contributions. The covalent component gradually increases as the difference of donor-acceptor proton affinities, DeltaPA, or acidic constants, DeltapK(a), approaches zero. At this limit, the strong and symmetrical D...H...A bonds formed can be viewed as true three-center-four-electron covalent bonds. These results emphasize the role PA/pK(a) equalization plays in strengthening the H-bond, a hypothesis often invoked in the past but never fully verified. In this Account, this hypothesis is reconsidered by using a new instrument, the pK(a) slide rule, a bar chart that reports in separate scales the pK(a)'s of the D-H proton donors and :A proton acceptors most frequently involved in D-H...:A bond formation. Allowing the two scales to shift so to bring selected donor and acceptor molecules into coincidence, the ruler permits graphical evaluation of DeltapK(a) and then empirical appreciation of the D-H...:A bond strength according to the pK(a) equalization principle. Reliability of pK(a) slide rule predictions has been verified by extensive comparison with two classical sources of H-bond strengths: (i) the gas-phase dissociation enthalpies of charged [X...H...X](-) and [X...H...X](+) bonds derived from the thermodynamic NIST Database and (ii) the geometries of more than 9500 H-bonds retrieved from the Cambridge Structural Database. The results attest that the pK(a) slide rule provides a reliable solution for the long-standing problem of H-bond-strength prediction and represents an efficient and practical tool for making such predictions directly accessible to all scientists.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/ar800001k

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 744

Metadata

Authors
Gilli, P., Pretto, L., Bertolasi, V., & Gilli, G.
Venue
Accounts of Chemical Research
Published
2008-10-16
Volume
42
Issue
1
Pages
33-44
ISSN
  • 0001-4842 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-4898
OpenAlex
W1988195234
Cited by
744
References
22
FWCI
19.70
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

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.