Singlet Diradicals from a Cyclopentane-1,3-diyl
J. Am. Chem. Soc., Vol. 120, No. 44, 1998 11307
Table 2. Photoreactions of the Spiroepoxy Azoalkane 1 in
in both the direct and sensitized photolysis, while in 10% MeOH
(entry 8), a significant drop in the amount of the MeOH adduct
6 was found in the direct photolysis.
Methanola
product distribution (%)b
In the presence of 1,3-cyclohexadiene (entry 5)22 or oxygen
(up to 2 atm) as triplet quenchers almost the same product ratio
as in the direct photolysis (entry 1) was observed. The
insensitivity toward addition of triplet quenchers rules out the
intervention of a long-lived azoalkane triplet state. In fact, since
2,3-diazabicyclohept-2-ene and its derivatives, except some
special cases,23 do not undergo intersystem crossing (ISC),24
we assume that the chemical reactivity derives from the singlet-
entry
1
conditions
6′ () 3)
6
1
2
3
syn 333/351 nm
anti 333/351 nm
syn Ph2CO (0.05 M), 364 nm
anti Ph2CO (0.05 M), 364 nm
syn 1,3-cyclohexadiene (1 M),
333/351 nm
syn 333/351 nm
syn Ph2CO (0.05 M), 364 nm
syn 333/351 nm
78
79
91
91
80
22
21
9
9
20
4
5c
6d
7d
8e
73
87
90
27
13
10
S
excited azoalkane 1*.
Quantum-Chemical Calculations. The assessment of the
ground-state multiplicity of diradicals has remained a compu-
tational challenge over the years.3,5 High-level, ab initio
calculations with configuration interaction for the proper
description of such open-shell species and electron correlation,
e.g., the CISD and CASPT2 methods with large basis sets, are
expensive and inapplicable for the large systems as examined
herein.3,5 Also, experimental studies on absolute singlet-triplet
energy gaps may show a considerable scatter and have often
borne out surprising effects,25 which render the selection of a
reliable computational procedure, i.e., one which reproduces
experimental findings, quite difficult.
a At 15 °C, 36.0 µmol 1 in 0.7 mL of degassed C6H6/MeOH (1:1),
unless otherwise noted; azoalkane consumption was >95% and the mass
balance >88%, except for entry 5 (75%). b Relative yields (normalized
1
to 100%) are based on H NMR (200 MHz) peak areas of the methyl
singlets (δ 3.22 ppm for 6 and 3.05 ppm for 6′); the reproducibility
was (0.8% for independent experiments. c O2 (up to 2 atm) showed
no effect on the product ratios. d The photoreactions (1, 36.0 µmol)
were run at 15 °C in 0.7 mL of degassed MeOH. e The photoreaction
(1, 36.0 µmol) was run at 15 °C in 0.7 mL of degassed C6H6/MeOH
(9:1).
favored due to the stabilization of the unpaired electron at the
benzylic site by phenyl conjugation (Scheme 1).20
Time-resolved (nanosecond time scale) laser-flash spectros-
copy was performed to detect intermediates (λexc ) 351 nm,
25-ns pulse); however, no transient with significant absorption
above 300 nm was observed. This result rules out that the
regioisomeric 1,4-diradical 1,4-DR′, derived from C-C-bond
cleavage of the epoxide ring (Scheme 1), is formed as an
intermediate since such diradicals should be sufficiently long-
lived and should show sufficiently strong absorption in the UV
region (benzyl chromophore) to allow detection by laser flash
photolysis.5,6 Furthermore, no paramagnetic species could be
detected by EPR spectroscopy under matrix isolation (MTHF,
at 77 K), which indicates that a diradical with a triplet ground
state does not intervene under these conditions.4,10
Methanol-Trapping Experiments. The 1,4-diradical (1,4-
DR, Scheme 1) is expected to possess pronounced dipolar
(zwitterionic) character due to the localized negative charge on
the electronegative oxygen atom and allylic stabilization of the
positive charge.19a,21 Consequently, to provide evidence for
dipolar character in the 1,4-diradical (1,4-DR), the photoreac-
tions of azoalkane 1 were performed in the presence of MeOH
to trap such intermediates. As shown in Table 2, in 1:1 MeOH/
C6H6 the methanol adducts 6 and 6′ (see Scheme 2) were
obtained instead of the oxetane 3. The structure of adduct 6′
was determined by oxidation to the ketone 7 (56%) with
pyridium chlorochromate (PCC); the regioisomer 6 expectedly
resisted oxidation (see Supporting Information). A control
experiment showed that the oxetane 3 was exclusively (96%)
converted to the MeOH adduct 6′. Even in the triplet-sensitized
denitrogenation (entries 3, 4, 7), the MeOH adduct 6 was
observed but by 10% (absolute) less than in the direct photolysis
(cf. the 6:6′ product ratios in Table 2). In pure MeOH (entries
6 and 7), a small increase in the 6 trapping product was observed
Density functional theory (DFT) is well-known to handle
properly both open-shell and closed-shell structures,26a and we
have employed this method for the diradical intermediates A-D.
Although the question has been raised whether spin-projected
rather than uncorrected energies should be employed in the
calculation of diradicals by density functional theory,26 we find
that the uncorrected DFT energies reproduce adequately the
experimental data. Hence, the UB3LYP/6-31G* level of theory
(in Gaussian 94)27 provides excellent results on the singlet-
triplet gaps of diradicals for some experimentally examined 1,3-
cyclopentanediyl systems (Table 1).
The calculations confirm a triplet ground state for the parent
1,3-cyclopentanediyl and a singlet ground state for the 2,2-
difluoro derivative. The calculated singlet-triplet energy gaps
for these model species agree well with the data from the
highest-level computations (Table 1). For the spiroepoxy
diradical D, the singlet ground state is favored by 1.0 kcal/mol
(0.7 kcal/mol when corrected for the zero-point vibrational
energies). The preference for singlet-spin multiplicity is much
less pronounced than for the 2,2-difluoro case, as would be
expected from the reduced through-bond interaction imposed
by one alkoxy versus two fluoro groups.
(22) The triplet energy of 1,3-cyclohexadiene is 52 kcal/mol (Kellogg,
R. E.; Schwenker, R. P. J. Chem. Phys. 1964, 41, 2860); that of
2,3-diazabicyclo[2.2.1]hept-2-ene (DBH) derivatives is ca. 60 kcal/mol (ref
14), and thus the triplet quenching is feasible.
(23) (a) Adam, W.; Nau, W. M.; Sendelbach, J.; Wirz, J. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 1993, 115, 12571. (b) Adam, W.; Fragale, G.; Klapstein, D.; Nau, W.
M.; Wirz, J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 12578.
(24) (a) Clark, W. D. K.; Steel, C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1971, 93, 6347.
(b) Engel, P. S.; Culotta, A. M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1991, 113, 2686.
(25) See, for example, Matsuda, K.; Iwamura, H. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
1997, 119, 7412.
(19) For dipolar character in singlet diradicals see (a) Salem, L.; Rowland,
C. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 1972, 11, 92. (b) Jean, Y.; Salem, L. J.
Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1971, 382. (c) Horsley, J. A.; Jean, Y.; Moser,
C.; Salem, L.; Sevens, R. M.; Wright, J. S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1972, 94,
279.
(20) (a) Griller, D.; Ingold, K. U. Acc. Chem. Res. 1980, 13, 317. (b)
Bowry, V. W.; Lusztyk, J.; Ingold, K. U. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1991, 113,
5687. (c) Stogryn, E. L.; Gianni, M. H. Tetrahedron Lett. 1970, 3025. (d)
Ayral-Kaloustian, S.; Agosta, W. C. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1980, 102, 314.
(21) Platz, M. S. In Diradicals; Borden, W. T., Ed.; Wiley-Interscience:
New York, 1982; pp 195-258.
(26) (a) Goldstein, E.; Beno, B.; Houk, K. N. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996,
118, 6036. (b) Cramer, C. J.; Smith, B. A. J. Phys. Chem. 1996, 9664.
(27) Gaussian 94. Frisch, M. J.; Trucks, G. W.; Schlegel, H. B.; Gill, P.
M. W.; Johnson, B. G.; Robb, M. A.; Cheeseman, J. R.; Keith, T.; Petersson,
G. A.; Montgomery, J. A.; Raghavachari, K.; Al-Laham, M. A.; Zakrzewski,
V. G.; Ortiz, J. V.; Foresman, J. B.; Cioslowski, J.; Stefanov, B. B.;
Nanayakkara, A.; Challacombe, M.; Peng, C. Y.; Ayala, P. Y.; Chen, W.;
Wong, M. W.; Andres, J. L.; Replogle, E. S.; Gomperts, R.; Martin, R. L.;
Fox, D. J.; Binkley, J. S.; Defrees, D. J.; Baker, J.; Stewart, J. P.; Head-
Gordon, M.; Gonzalez, C.; Pople, J. A., Gaussian Inc.: Pittsburgh, PA,
1995 Revision A.1.