Acceptor solvents, definition

Lewis defined a base as an electron-pair donor and an acid as an electron-pair acceptor. This definition further expands the list to include metal ions and other electron pair acceptors as acids and provides a handy framework for nonaqueous reactions. Most of the acid-base descriptions in this book will use the Lewis definition, which encompasses the Brpnsted-Lowry and solvent system definitions. In addition to all the reactions discussed previously, the Lewis definition includes reactions such as... 

A1C13, or S02 in an inert solvent cause colour changes in indicators similar to those produced by hydrochloric acid, and these changes are reversed by bases so that titrations can be carried out. Compounds of the type of BF3 are usually described as Lewis acids or electron acceptors. The Lewis bases (e.g. ammonia, pyridine) are virtually identical with the Bransted-Lowry bases. The great disadvantage of the Lewis definition of acids is that, unlike proton-transfer reactions, it is incapable of general quantitative treatment. 

Since Arrhenius, definitions have extended the scope of what we mean by acids and bases. These theories include the proton transfer definition of Bronsted-Lowry (Bronsted, 1923 Lowry, 1923a,b), the solvent system concept (Day Selbin, 1969), the Lux-Flood theory for oxide melts, the electron pair donor and acceptor definition of Lewis (1923, 1938) and the broad theory of Usanovich (1939). These theories are described in more detail below. 

In solutions neither H+ nor e can exist in a free state they will be donated only if they are accepted within the solution, e.g., by another acceptor, which may be the solvent and thus cause solvation here the mere solvation of electrons is an exceptional case, but may occur, e.g., in liquid ammonia, where according to Kraus82 the strongly reducing alkali metals dissolve while dissociating into cations M+ and solvated electrons e, which, however, are soon converted into NH2" and H2 gas. Further, from the analogy with acid-base reactions and the definition of... 

Those photosensitive systems mentioned above consist of at least one vinyl compound which has an electron donating or accepting property. When both acceptor and donor are non-polymerizable, the system is not photosensitive. Photopolymerization of styrene is not sensitized by the ECZ-CH3CN pair. The definition of donor and acceptor is a matter of relativity. Styrene is by no means neutral, but there should be no objection to considering it as a weaker donor than VCZ or ECZ and a weaker acceptor than AN or CH8CN. Photoirradiation of AN, VCZ or styrene alone in a neutral solvent, such as benzene, or in bulk does not bring about any appreciable rate of polymerization. 

The characterization of the acceptor properties of solvents is a more difficult problem. The definition of an analogous thermochemical quantity is not possible because many solvents contain atoms with lone pair electrons and thus may undergo adduct formation with strong reference acceptors. 

Physical organic chemists have tended to examine parameters based on shifts in the absorption peaks in the spectra of various dyes or indicator molecules. The a and P scales of Taft and Kamlet, the ET(30) scale of Dimroth and Reichardt, the 7t scale of Taft and co-workers and the Z value of Kosower are all examples of this type of parameter. The definitions and measurement means for these parameters, as well as important references, are shown in Table 5. An alternative definition of the Dimroth-Reichardt parameter is the dimensionless, ETN, which is now preferred by some organic chemists (for a discussion see Ref. 15). The Z value is important in that it led to the scale of Dimroth and Reichardt, which overcomes many of the limitations of the earlier scale. Several workers have shown that relationships exist, with good correlation coefficients, between similar parameters. Thus, DN is linearly related to p, both parameters being designed to measure the donor properties (or Lewis basicity) of solvent molecules. Also, Lr(30) is related to a as well as to AN all three parameters purport to measure the electron acceptor properties (or Lewis acidity) of solvent molecules. It has been found that different solvent types have different coefficients in linear relationships between n and the dipole moment. The Taft and Dimroth-Reichardt parameters, in particular, have been found to correlate with free energies and... 

These various influences of the solvent will make the classification of acceptors dependent upon the medium used, as far as the formal definition goes, i. e. according to the criteria given above. But independent of this, that tendency for covalent bond formation which is ultimately responsible for (b) -behaviour will remain, as it is a property linked to the electronic configuration of the acceptor. It should therefore perhaps be possible to order the acceptors in a softness sequence, i.e. in a sequence of ability to form covalent bonds. 

A more general definition of the FCWD includes overlap integrals of quantum nuclear modes. The definition given by Eq. [19] includes only classical solvent modes (superscript s ) for which these overlap integrals are identically equal to unity. An extension of Eq. [19] to the case of quantum intramolecular excitations of the donor-acceptor complex is given below in the section discussing optical Franck-Condon factors. 

There are several fundamental reasons why the GMH and adiabatic formulations are to be preferred over the traditionally employed diabatic formulation. The definition of the diabatic basis set is straightforward for intermolecular ET reactions when the donor and acceptor units are separated before the reaction and form a donor-acceptor complex in the course of diffusion in a liquid solvent. The diabatic states are then defined as those of separate donor and acceptor units. The current trend in experimental design of donor-acceptor systems, however, has focused more attention on intramolecular reactions where the donor and acceptor units are coupled in one molecule by a bridge.The direct donor-acceptor overlap and the mixing to bridge states both lead to electronic delocalization, with the result that the centers of electronic localization and localized diabatic states are ill-defined. It is then more appropriate to use either the GMH or adiabatic formulation. 

Some liquid covalent halides can act as nonaqueous solvents " based on Lewis acid-base behavior, according to the donor-acceptor definition. The self-dissociated ions consist of a cation formed by subtraction of a hahde ion from the neutral compound, while the anion is formed by its addition (equation 24). Salts derived from such covalent halides can be considered as titration products of the parent acidic and basic compounds (equations 25 and 26). In such cases, both the cation and the anion usually possess a stable coordination number with a high geometrical symmetry. 

At present, various kinds of donor-acceptor interactions are considered to be acid-base ones, in the framework of an appropriate acid-base concept [10-12]. The last century witnessed the development of a few such definitions, which can be translated conditionally to definitions of carriers of acidic (basic) properties, those for a solvent system, and principles for the prediction of the behaviour of acid-base reactions in various media. 

The lower the value of this constant, the larger the deferences in acidity indices (pH) between the standard solutions of strong acids and bases, that results in a wider acid-base range for the solvent. This refers not only to the acid-base equilibria in aqueous solutions but also applies to any donor-acceptor interaction in molecular solvents which are prone to heterolytic dissociation with the formation of acidic and basic particles, as provided by an appropriate definition of acids and bases. It follows from equations (1.1.3) and (1.1.4) that the Arrhenius definition can only be used for the description of acid-base interactions in aqueous solutions, since the reaction between the acid of solvent and the base of solvent can result in the formation only of the solvent molecules. In the case considered, this solvent is water. 

A more general definition of acid-base equilibrium in molecular solvents was proposed independently by Brpnsted and Lowry, who extended the term base . According to them, the acid is a donor of protons, and they defined a base only as an acceptor of H+. According to the Brpnsted-Lowry definition, the dissociation of an acid results in the formation of a proton and a conjugate base ... 

The choice of acid or base for solvent is simplified appreciably for melts containing complex ions (as a rule, they are anions), which are prone to the acid-base dissociation. Dissociation of this ion is assumed as the intrinsic acid-base equilibrium of a melt of such kind. In this case, the simpler eliminated anion will be considered as the base of the solvent and the coordinationally unsaturated residue will be the acidic particle of the solvent. Naturally, the division of particles formed by the auto-dissociation into acids and bases is made on the basis of the Lewis definition [13] an acid is the acceptor of an electron pair and a base is the donor of this electron pair. Ionic melts based on complex halides of gallium(III) [28], aluminium(III) [29] and boron(III) [30,31] may serve as examples of successful application of the above approach. The electron-deficient covalent halide (e.g. A1C13, BF3) in these melts is the solvent acid, and the corresponding halide ion is the base of the solvents ... 

Quantitative investigations of the reactions of oxide ions and oxo-compounds in high-temperature ionic solvents are, therefore, of considerable scientific and applied importance. The interactions of such kinds are referred to as acid-base ones, according to Lewis. Since 1939, when Lux proposed a definition of acids as oxide ion acceptors and bases as donors of O2-, such acid-base interactions came to be called oxoacidity . The most general scheme of a Lux acid-base interaction is presented by the following equation ... 

---