Volume 38, Issue S24 pp. 153-166
Article
Full Access

A molecular orbital valence bond study of 3-methyl sydnone and 3-methyl pseudosydnone

D. D. Shillady

D. D. Shillady

Departments of Chemistry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia

Search for more papers by this author
S. Cutler

S. Cutler

Departments of Chemistry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia

Search for more papers by this author
L. F. Jones

L. F. Jones

Departments of Chemistry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia

Search for more papers by this author
L. B. Kier

L. B. Kier

Departments of Medicinal Chemistry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 17/24 March 1990
Citations: 15

Abstract

A pair-excitation-multiconfigurational-self-consistent-field (PEMCSCF) study with 10 configurations has been carried out on 3-methyl-1,2,4-oxadiazolin-5-one (3-methyl pseudosydnone) which has normal covalent bonds but is isoelectronic with 3-methyl sydnone for which no single covalent valence bond structure can be drawn. The PEMCSCF results were found to be very similar for the two isoelectronic compounds and an attempt was made to represent the bonding of the sydnone in only two simple molecular-orbital-valence-bond (MOVB) configurations using a Luken-type correlating orbital. A compact minimum basis of Slater–Transform–Preuss functions fitted by six cartesian gaussian orbitals (STP–6G) is used to express the compact representation for chemical comparison to experiment. The molecular geometry was gradient-optimized at the single determinantal level using a 6–31G extended basis set. “Orthonormal Resonance Analysis” is given for the two dominant configurations by noting that the Boys–Reeves configuration interaction algorithm is identical to the Pauling valence bond algorithm except for use of orthogonal molecular orbitals instead of atomic hybrid orbitals. This equivalence permits use of PEMCSCF atomic charges, bond orders, and dipole moments in a slightly modified valence bond interpretation of the unusual bonding of this compound. Although forcing a larger PEMCSCF problem into a minimum basis and only two configurations raises the energy, chemical interpretation is simplified. This comparison between a mesoionic compound and an isoelectric compound with normal bonding offers new understanding of the mesoionic effect.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.