Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 193

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Why Do the Heavy-Atom Analogues of Acetylene E2H2 (E = Si−Pb) Exhibit Unusual Structures?

Lein, Matthias, Krapp, Andreas, Frenking, Gernot·2005·Journal of the American Chemical Society

Abstract

DFT calculations at BP86/QZ4P have been carried out for different structures of E(2)H(2) (E = C, Si, Ge, Sn, Pb) with the goal to explain the unusual equilibrium geometries of the heavier group 14 homologues where E = Si-Pb. The global energy minima of the latter molecules have a nonplanar doubly bridged structure A followed by the singly bridged planar form B, the vinylidene-type structure C, and the trans-bent isomer D1. The energetically high-lying trans-bent structure D2 possessing an electron sextet at E and the linear form HEEH, which are not minima on the PES, have also been studied. The unusual structures of E(2)H(2) (E = Si-Pb) are explained with the interactions between the EH moieties in the (X(2)Pi) electronic ground state which differ from C(2)H(2), which is bound through interactions between CH in the a(4)Sigma(-) excited state. Bonding between two (X(2)Pi) fragments of the heavier EH hydrides is favored over the bonding in the a(4)Sigma(-) excited state because the X(2)Pi --> a(4)Sigma(-) excitation energy of EH (E = Si-Pb) is significantly higher than for CH. The doubly bridged structure A of E(2)H(2) has three bonding orbital contributions: one sigma bond and two E-H donor-acceptor bonds. The singly bridged isomer B also has three bonding orbital contributions: one pi bond, one E-H donor-acceptor bond, and one lone-pair donor-acceptor bond. The trans-bent form D1 has one pi bond and two lone-pair donor-acceptor bonds, while D2 has only one sigma bond. The strength of the stabilizing orbital contributions has been estimated with an energy decomposition analysis, which also gives the bonding contributions of the quasi-classical electrostatic interactions.

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/ja042295c

Cites

1 of 1 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

  • Chemistry with ADF

    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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Lein, M., Krapp, A., & Frenking, G.
Venue
Journal of the American Chemical Society
Published
2005-04-07
Volume
127
Issue
17
Pages
6290-6299
ISSN
  • 0002-7863 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5126
OpenAlex
W1986394484
Cited by
193
References
1
FWCI
6.35
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.