用于反应障碍预测的理论和机器学习模型:烯酸和甲烯酸基的激素反应
Makito Takagi1, Tomomi Shimazaki1, Osamu Kobayashi1
1Quantum Chemistry Division, Yokohama City University, Seto 22-2, Kanazawa-ku, Yokohama 236-0027, Kanagawa, Japan. mtakagi@yokohama-cu.ac.jp.
Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP
|January 13, 2025
概括
我们开发了理论和机器学习模型来预测烯酸和甲烯酸基反应的反应障碍. 这些方法,包括密度函数理论和随机森林,通过实现更快的预测来加速材料的发展.
科学领域:
- 计算化学是一种计算化学.
- 材料科学是一种材料科学.
- 机器学习是机器学习.
背景情况:
- 预测反应障碍对于理解化学反应和开发新材料至关重要.
- 密度函数理论 (DFT) 的计算是准确的,但对于确定反应障碍的计算成本昂贵.
研究的目的:
- 开发准确和高效的模型,用于预测烯酸和甲烯酸基反应中的反应障碍 (ΔE_TS).
- 探索反应障碍与产品稳定能之间的理论关系.
- 创建一个机器学习模型,绕过了广泛的DFT计算的需要.
主要方法:
- 运用密度函数理论 (DFT) 来计算100个过渡状态 (TS) 结构,用于代表性的根基反应.
- 建立了 ΔE_TS 和产品稳定能之间的理论关系,包括贝尔-埃文斯-波兰尼 (BEP) 和马库斯类模型.
- 开发了一个基于随机森林 (RF) 的机器学习 (ML) 模型来预测 ΔE_TS.
主要成果:
- 成功将DFT衍生TS数据与理论模型相关联.
- 构建回归模型用于预测 ΔE_TS.
- 证明了基于射频的ML模型在预测DE_TS方面的有效性,与DFT相比显著降低了计算成本.
结论:
- 提出的理论和基于射频的ML模型为预测反应障碍提供了更快,更有效的方法.
- 这些方法有可能加速新材料的发现和开发.
- 这项研究强调了计算化学和机器学习在推进化学研究中的协同作用.
相关概念视频
Radical Reactivity: Overview
2.0K
Radicals, the highly reactive species, gain stability by undergoing three different reactions. The first reaction involves a radical-radical coupling, in which a radical combines with another radical, forming a spin‐paired molecule. The second reaction is between a radical and a spin‐paired molecule, generating a new radical and a new spin‐paired molecule. The third reaction is radical decomposition in a unimolecular reaction, forming a new radical and a spin‐paired...
2.0K
Radical Reactivity: Electrophilic Radicals
1.8K
Radicals adjacent to electron‐withdrawing groups are called electrophilic radicals. These radicals readily react with nucleophilic alkenes. For example, the malonate radical, in which the radical center is flanked by two electron‐withdrawing groups, reacts readily with butyl vinyl ether, which consists of an electron‐donating oxygen substituent. The reaction between electrophilic malonate radical and nucleophilic vinyl ether is favored because the radical has a...
1.8K
Radical Reactivity: Steric Effects
1.9K
The presence of electron-donating, electron-withdrawing, or conjugating groups adjacent to a radical center, imparts electronic stabilization to the radicals. Examples of such electronically-stabilized radicals are triphenylmethyl, tetramethylpiperidine‐N‐oxide, and 2,2‐diphenyl‐1‐picrylhydrazyl. These radicals are remarkably stable and are known as persistent radicals. Some of the persistent radicals can even be isolated and purified.
Along with electronic...
Along with electronic...
1.9K
Radical Reactivity: Intramolecular vs Intermolecular
1.7K
Radical reactions can occur either intermolecularly or intramolecularly. In an intermolecular radical reaction, a nucleophilic radical adds to an electrophilic alkene or vice versa. In such reactions, the radical and generally the alkene, which is also called the radical trap, are two different molecules. Additionally, for such intermolecular reactions to occur, the radical trap must be active, present in an excess concentration, and the radical starting material must have a weak...
1.7K
Radical Reactivity: Concentration Effects
1.5K
In a radical reaction, the concentration of starting materials governs the selectivity of a radical. For example, the reaction between an alkyl halide and an alkene, in the presence of tin hydride and AIBN, begins with the generation of a tin radical. The generated radical then abstracts halogen from the alkyl halide, producing an alkyl radical. This alkyl radical can either react with tin hydride, yielding an alkane, or add to an alkene, generating a nitrile-stabilized radical, eventually...
1.5K
Radical Reactivity: Nucleophilic Radicals
2.0K
Radicals adjacent to electron-donating groups are called nucleophilic radicals. These radicals readily react with electrophilic alkenes. The SOMO–LUMO interactions are the driving force for the reaction, where the high-energy SOMO of the electron-rich, nucleophilic radicals interacts with the low-energy LUMO of the electron-deficient, electrophilic alkenes. Such SOMO–LUMO interactions are the basis of reactive radical traps, affecting the selectivity in radical reactions. For...
2.0K


