Photocyclization of Iminyl Radicals
CASPT2//CASSCF strategy.7 This requires the reaction coordinate
to be computed at the complete active space self-consistent field
(CASSCF) level of theory and the corresponding energy profile to
be re-evaluated at the multiconfigurational second-order Møller-
Plesset perturbation theory level (here we use the CASPT2 method
implemented in MOLCAS-6.4)8 to take into account the effect of
electron dynamic correlation. The calculation of the reaction path
was carried out using the 4-pentenal O-acyloxime 1 and the reaction
coordinate was obtained via minimum energy path (MEP) computa-
tions at the CASSCF level with the 6-31G* basis set and an active
space of 14 electrons in 11 orbitals (π and π* orbitals of the imine,
alkene, and carbonyl moieties, N and O lone pairs, and σ and σ*
orbitals for the N-O bond). The zeroth-order wave function used
in the single-point CASPT2 calculations needed for the re-evaluation
of the MEP energy profile (see above) is a three-root (S0, S1, S2)
state average CASSCF wave function. The same type of wave
function was used where necessary in order to avoid convergence
problems.
Radical ground-state calculations were carried out using the
Gaussian 03 program package.9 Becke’s three-parameter hybrid
exchange potential (B3)10 was used with the Perdew-Wang
(PW91)11 gradient-corrected correlation functional, B3PW91. This
method has been shown to describe bond cleavage more accurately
than pure DFT methods.12 The standard split-valence 6-31+G* basis
set was employed. Geometry was fully optimized without any
symmetry constraint for all model compounds. Optimized structures
were characterized as minima or saddle points by frequency
calculations, which also allowed ZPE and thermal corrections to
be obtained.
FIGURE 1. Calculated transitions (blue) for model 1 and experimental
UV spectrum (black) for compound 2.
electrons in 11 orbitals. We included π and π* orbitals for the
CdC, CdN and CdO double bonds, lone pairs for the nitrogen
and oxygen atoms and the σ and σ* orbitals for the N-O bond.
The light absorption of model compound 1 was initially
evaluated and the results are shown in Figure 1. The calculated
n-π* S0 f S1 transition has an oscillator strength of 0.014
with a λmax of 233 nm (123 kcal/mol, 5.32 eV), while the π-π*
S0 f S2 transition has an oscillator strength of 0.2 with a λmax
of 212 nm (135 kcal/mol, 5.86 eV). These values are consistent
with the experimental spectrum of 5-hexen-2-one O-acetyloxime
2 (Figure 1), in which the bands appear at 234 nm with f )
0.08 and at 204 nm with f ) 0.23. These data show that S2 is
the spectroscopic state while S1 is an excited dark state. Excited-
state relaxation was studied through an MEP calculation, as
shown in Figure 2. Every step was obtained by minimization
of the PES on a hypersphere centered on the initial geometry
with a predefined radius at the CASSCF level (Figure 2a).
Subsequent CASPT2 calculations were performed for the states
of interest (S0, S1, and S2) at each point of the MEP (Figure 2 b).
As can be seen, relaxation on the S2 PES leads directly to
N-O bond cleavage. This is due to the coupling between the
imine π* and the σ* N-O orbitals, which increases the
occupancy of the σ* orbital. Indeed, the first part of the MEP
coordinate is controlled by N-O bond elongation, which leads
to stabilization of the S2 state and, as a consequence, to a
decrease in the S2-S1 energy gap. The main geometry modi-
fication is the increase in the N-O bond length, while the rest
of the molecule remains almost unchanged. Population of S1
will be possible at this point given that the energy gap between
S1 and S2 is small. Subsequent elongation of the N-O bond
leads to further stabilization of S1 (and S2) and this in turn leads
to a situation where two radicals are formed and the three PES
become almost degenerate. The main geometric change in this
part of the MEP corresponds with the two C-O distances which
progressively become similar, as expected for the acetyl radical
formation. The main features of the MEP are the same for both
CASSCF and CASPT2 calculations. It should be noted,
however, that the S2/S1 crossing takes place early after the
Results and Discussion
Theoretical Calculations. In order to gain further insights
into the reaction mechanism, we decided to explore this process
by means of theoretical calculations. We tried to obtain a
comprehensive view of the reaction path from light absorption
to product formation. Thus, the level of theory used depended
on the main process involved. The first part of the reaction
mechanism involves a photochemically driven N-O cleavage
and the CASPT2//CASSCF strategy was therefore used as this
has proven to give reliable results for this kind of reaction.7,13
In particular, we used model compound 1 to explore the
photochemical reaction path using an active space of 14
(7) Olivucci, M. Computational Photochemistry; Elsevier: Amsterdam
2005.
(8) Karlstrom, G.; Lindh, R.; Malmqvist, P.-A.; Roos, B. O.; Ryde, U.;
Veryazov, V.; Widmark, P.-O.; Cossi, M.; Schimmelpfennig, B.; Neogrady,
P.; Seijo, L. Comp. Mater. Sci. 2003, 28, 222.
(9) Gaussian 03, Revision C.02: Frisch, M. J.; Trucks, G. W.; Schlegel,
H. B.; Scuseria, G. E.; Robb, M. A.; Cheeseman, J. R.; Montgomery, J.
A.; Vreven, T.; Kudin, K. N.; Burant, J. C.; Millam, J. M.; Iyengar, S. S.;
Tomasi, J.; Barone, V.; Mennucci, B.; Cossi, M.; Scalmani, G.; Rega, N.;
Petersson, G. A.; Nakatsuji, H.; Hada, M.; Ehara, M.; Toyota, K.; Fukuda,
R.; Hasegawa, J.; Ishida, M.; Nakajima, T.; Honda, Y.; Kitao, O.; Nakai,
H.; Klene, M.; Li, X.; Knox, J. E.; Hratchian, H. P.; Cross, J. B.; Bakken,
V.; Adamo, C.; Jaramillo, J.; Gomperts, R.; Stratmann, R. E.; Yazyev, O.;
Austin, A. J.; Cammi, R.; Pomelli, C.; Ochterski, J. W.; Ayala, P. Y.;
Morokuma, K.; Voth, G. A.; Salvador, P.; Dannenberg, J. J.; Zakrzewski,
V. G.; Dapprich, S.; Daniels, A. D.; Strain, M. C.; Farkas, O.; Malick, D.
K.; Rabuck, A. D.; Raghavachari, K.; Foresman, J. B.; Ortiz, J. V.; Cui,
Q.; Baboul, A. G.; Clifford, S.; Cioslowski, J.; Stefanov, B. B.; Liu, G.;
Liashenko, A.; Piskorz, P.; Komaromi, I.; Martin, R. L.; Fox, D. J.; Keith,
T.; Al-Laham, M. A.; Peng, C. Y.; Nanayakkara, A.; Challacombe, M.;
Gill, P. M. W.; Johnson, B.; Chen, W.; Wong, M. W.; Gonzalez, C.; Pople,
J. A. Gaussian, Inc., Wallingford CT, 2004
(10) Becke, A. D. J. Chem. Phys. 1993, 98, 5648.
(11) Perdew, J. P.; Burke, K.; Wang, Y. Phys. ReV. B 1996, 54, 16533.
(12) Jensen, F. Introduction to Computational Chemistry; Wiley: New
York, 1999; p 283.
(13) Kutateladze, A. G. Computational Methods in Photochemistry; CRC
Press: Boca Raton, 2005.
J. Org. Chem, Vol. 73, No. 6, 2008 2235