Soft bases definition

Model Definition. The HSAB model classifies Lewis acids (electrophiles) and bases (nucleophiles) as either "hard" or "soft." Hard acids and bases are relatively small, and exhibit low polarizability and a comparatively low tendency to form covalent bonds. Soft acids and bases have the opposite characteristics (24). Stated simply, the model postulates that hard acids react most readily with hard bases, and soft acids react most readily with soft bases (26). 

Just like Sanderson s electronegativity equalization principle, the Hard and Soft Acids and Bases principle was originally introduced without strong theoretical basis. Nevertheless, it was used widely from its formulation on. The principle states that hard acids prefer to coordinate with hard bases and soft acids with soft bases [82], In 1983, Parr and Pearson provided a definition for the chemical hardness [25]... 

Metal carbonyl complexes are an interesting series of coordination compounds in which the ligands are CO molecules, and in many cases the metals are present in a zero oxidation state. In these complexes, both the metal and ligand are soft according to the Lewis acid-base definitions. Although the discussion at first will be limited to the binary compounds containing only metal and CO, many mixed complexes are known that contain both CO and other ligands. 

Particularly relevant to the present crmtext is the fact that the olefinic double bond is considered as a soft base in Pearson s theory, while many Lewis acids used in cationic polymerisation (BF3, BCI3, AICI3, etc.) are classed as hard acids. Obviously, n-acceptors like chloranil or tetracyanoethylene are considered as soft acids. Thus, the interactions between Lewis acids and olefins must be considered as very weak in the context of the HSAB theory. This prediction is well substantiated by the tenuous character of the complexes observed in experimental studies (see Chap. IV). On the other hand, carbenium ions are usually placed at the borderline between hard and soft acids and are definitely softer than the Lewis acids mentioned above. Consequently, their interactions with olefins must be rather strong, which suggests that that propagation in cationic polymerisations promoted by Lewis acids should be faster than initiation. 

Concepts of acidity and basicity are, in practice, defined and evaluated by their utility. Since overly formd definitions can be restrictive the concepts of acidity evolve towaids more comprehensive definitions. For example the Lewis definition includes the Broensted definition simply regarding the proton as an electron acceptor. Because the interaction of Broensted acids and bases in solutions involves a common process, protic transfer, scales of acidity can be established, for example the Hammett [1] acidity function. For Lewis acid-base interaction there is no common process to provide a unique basis for comparisons of acid strength. Experimentally, the strength of a Lewis acid depends upon the particular Lewis base. The classification of acids and bases as hard or soft in the principle of hard and soft acids and bases (HSAB principle) clarifies the interactions of Lewis acids and bases [2a]. Strong interactions occur between hard acid and hard base, or between soft acid and soft base, hi the hard-hard interaction there is a considerable electrostatic contribution to bonding and in the soft-soft interaction there is a major covalent contribution to bonding. The use of density functional analysis has clarified the concepts of hardness and softness and an empirical ranking of Lewis acids, based on local hardness is, proposed [2c]. 

The concept of softness has also been introduced, and the softness parameter S has been defined as the reciprocal of hardness, viz., 5 = if = 2(7 - A). The DFT-based definition for the softness parameter is also through the concept of local softness, as given by... 

The finite-difference (FD) definition based on vertical ionization energy (IP) and electron affinity (EA) scales was added for experimental assessment (Lackner Zweig, 1983). For comparison, the softness based chemical hardness values based on sphere-charged model of Pearson was also employed (Pearson, 1997). In all cases the atomic values were computed upon hydrogen calibration to its experimental 6.45 eV value. All values are in electron-volts (Putz, 2008c). 

The usefulness of these definitions is that there is a general principle governing the interactions of hard and soft acids and bases, namely that hard acids prefer to coordinate with hard bases and soft acids prefer to coordinate with soft bases. Clearly these are qualitative definitions and a qualitative principle, and there are many intermediate cases and exceptions. Nevertheless the ideas are useful in that they bring a certain limited order into the otherwise varied and rather incomprehensible behaviour of Lewis acids and bases. 

This chapter is intended to provide basic understanding and application of the effect of electric field on the reactivity descriptors. Section 25.2 will focus on the definitions of reactivity descriptors used to understand the chemical reactivity, along with the local hard-soft acid-base (HSAB) semiquantitative model for calculating interaction energy. In Section 25.3, we will discuss specifically the theory behind the effects of external electric field on reactivity descriptors. Some numerical results will be presented in Section 25.4. Along with that in Section 25.5, we would like to discuss the work describing the effect of other perturbation parameters. In Section 25.6, we would present our conclusions and prospects. 

The aim of this chapter is to discuss chemical reactivity and its application in the real world. Chemical reactivity is an established methodology within the realm of density functional theory (DFT). It is an activity index to propose intra- and intermolecular reactivities in materials using DFT within the domain of hard soft acid base (HS AB) principle. This chapter will address the key features of reactivity index, the definition, a short background followed by the aspects, which were developed within the reactivity domain. Finally, some examples mainly to design new materials related to key industrial issues using chemical reactivity index will be described. I wish to show that a simple theory can be state of the art to design new futuristic materials of interest to satisfy industrial needs. 

---