Top-Higgs htO and the Process γγ→ ZZYUE Chong-Xing; ZHAO Xian-Lin; ZHANG Yan-Ming; LI Hong【期刊名称】《《理论物理通讯（英文版）》》【年(卷),期】2003(039)006【摘要】In the context of topcolor-assisted technicolor(TC2) models,we calculate the s-channel contributions of the top-Higgs ht^0 to the process γγ→ZZ.We find that,for reasonable ranges of the paramters,ht^0 can give significant contributions to this process,when the top-Higgs mass approximately equals to the center-of-mass energy s and the free parameter ε=0.01,the cr oss section can reach 161 fb.which may be detected in the γγ collisions based on the future e+e- colliders.Thus,the process γγ→ZZ may be used to probe the top-Higgs and further test TC2 models in γγ collisions.【总页数】4页(P681-684)【关键词】顶级希格斯横截面; TC2型号【作者】YUE Chong-Xing; ZHAO Xian-Lin; ZHANG Yan-Ming; LI Hong【作者单位】Department of Physics Liaoning Normal University Dalian 116029 China; Department of Physics Henan Education Institute Zhengzhou 450014 China; College of Physics and Information Engineering Henan Normal University Xinxiang 453002 China【正文语种】中文【中图分类】O41因版权原因，仅展示原文概要，查看原文内容请购买。
a r X i v :h e p -e x /0207007v 1 1 J u l 2002BELLEBelle Prerpint 2002-18KEK Preprint 2002-59Study of B →ρπdecays at BelleBelle Collaboration A.Gordon u ,Y.Chao z ,K.Abe h ,K.Abe aq ,N.Abe at ,R.Abe ac ,T.Abe ar ,Byoung Sup Ahn o ,H.Aihara as ,M.Akatsu v ,Y.Asano ay ,T.Aso aw ,V.Aulchenko b ,T.Aushev ℓ,A.M.Bakich an ,Y.Ban ag ,A.Bay r ,I.Bedny b ,P.K.Behera az ,jak m ,A.Bondar b ,A.Bozek aa ,M.Braˇc ko t ,m ,T.E.Browder g ,B.C.K.Casey g ,M.-C.Chang z ,P.Chang z ,B.G.Cheon am ,R.Chistov ℓ,Y.Choi am ,Y.K.Choi am ,M.Danilov ℓ,L.Y.Dong j ,J.Dragic u ,A.Drutskoy ℓ,S.Eidelman b ,V.Eiges ℓ,Y.Enari v ,C.W.Everton u ,F.Fang g ,H.Fujii h ,C.Fukunaga au ,N.Gabyshev h ,A.Garmash b ,h ,T.Gershon h ,B.Golob s ,m ,R.Guo x ,J.Haba h ,T.Hara ae ,Y.Harada ac ,N.C.Hastings u ,H.Hayashii w ,M.Hazumi h ,E.M.Heenan u ,I.Higuchi ar ,T.Higuchi as ,L.Hinz r ,T.Hokuue v ,Y.Hoshi aq ,S.R.Hou z ,W.-S.Hou z ,S.-C.Hsu z ,H.-C.Huang z ,T.Igaki v ,Y.Igarashi h ,T.Iijima v ,K.Inami v ,A.Ishikawa v ,H.Ishino at ,R.Itoh h ,H.Iwasaki h ,Y.Iwasaki h ,H.K.Jang a ℓ,J.H.Kang bc ,J.S.Kang o ,N.Katayama h ,Y.Kawakami v ,N.Kawamura a ,T.Kawasaki ac ,H.Kichimi h ,D.W.Kim am ,Heejong Kim bc ,H.J.Kim bc ,H.O.Kim am ,Hyunwoo Kim o ,S.K.Kim a ℓ,T.H.Kim bc ,K.Kinoshita e ,S.Korpar t ,m ,P.Krokovny b ,R.Kulasiri e ,S.Kumar af ,A.Kuzmin b ,Y.-J.Kwon bc ,nge f ,ai ,G.Leder k ,S.H.Lee a ℓ,J.Li ak ,A.Limosani u ,D.Liventsevℓ,R.-S.Lu z,J.MacNaughton k,G.Majumder ao, F.Mandl k,D.Marlow ah,S.Matsumoto d,T.Matsumoto au,W.Mitaroffk,K.Miyabayashi w,Y.Miyabayashi v,H.Miyake ae,H.Miyata ac,G.R.Moloney u,T.Mori d,T.Nagamine ar,Y.Nagasaka i,T.Nakadaira as,E.Nakano ad, M.Nakao h,J.W.Nam am,Z.Natkaniec aa,K.Neichi aq, S.Nishida p,O.Nitoh av,S.Noguchi w,T.Nozaki h,S.Ogawa ap, T.Ohshima v,T.Okabe v,S.Okuno n,S.L.Olsen g,Y.Onuki ac, W.Ostrowicz aa,H.Ozaki h,P.Pakhlovℓ,H.Palka aa,C.W.Park o,H.Park q,L.S.Peak an,J.-P.Perroud r, M.Peters g,L.E.Piilonen ba,J.L.Rodriguez g,F.J.Ronga r, N.Root b,M.Rozanska aa,K.Rybicki aa,H.Sagawa h,S.Saitoh h,Y.Sakai h,M.Satapathy az,A.Satpathy h,e,O.Schneider r,S.Schrenk e,C.Schwanda h,k,S.Semenovℓ,K.Senyo v,R.Seuster g,M.E.Sevior u,H.Shibuya ap,V.Sidorov b,J.B.Singh af,S.Staniˇc ay,1,M.Stariˇc m,A.Sugi v, A.Sugiyama v,K.Sumisawa h,T.Sumiyoshi au,K.Suzuki h,S.Suzuki bb,S.Y.Suzuki h,T.Takahashi ad,F.Takasaki h, K.Tamai h,N.Tamura ac,J.Tanaka as,M.Tanaka h,G.N.Taylor u,Y.Teramoto ad,S.Tokuda v,S.N.Tovey u,T.Tsuboyama h,T.Tsukamoto h,S.Uehara h,K.Ueno z, Y.Unno c,S.Uno h,hiroda h,G.Varner g,K.E.Varvell an,C.C.Wang z,C.H.Wang y,J.G.Wang ba,M.-Z.Wang z,Y.Watanabe at,E.Won o,B.D.Yabsley ba,Y.Yamada h, A.Yamaguchi ar,Y.Yamashita ab,M.Yamauchi h,H.Yanai ac,P.Yeh z,Y.Yuan j,Y.Yusa ar,J.Zhang ay,Z.P.Zhang ak,Y.Zheng g,and D.ˇZontar aya Aomori University,Aomori,Japanb Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics,Novosibirsk,Russiac Chiba University,Chiba,Japand Chuo University,Tokyo,Japane University of Cincinnati,Cincinnati,OH,USAf University of Frankfurt,Frankfurt,Germanyg University of Hawaii,Honolulu,HI,USAh High Energy Accelerator Research Organization(KEK),Tsukuba,Japani Hiroshima Institute of Technology,Hiroshima,Japanj Institute of High Energy Physics,Chinese Academy of Sciences,Beijing,PRChinak Institute of High Energy Physics,Vienna,Austria ℓInstitute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics,Moscow,Russiam J.Stefan Institute,Ljubljana,Slovenian Kanagawa University,Yokohama,Japano Korea University,Seoul,South Koreap Kyoto University,Kyoto,Japanq Kyungpook National University,Taegu,South Korear Institut de Physique des Hautes´Energies,Universit´e de Lausanne,Lausanne,Switzerlands University of Ljubljana,Ljubljana,Sloveniat University of Maribor,Maribor,Sloveniau University of Melbourne,Victoria,Australiav Nagoya University,Nagoya,Japanw Nara Women’s University,Nara,Japanx National Kaohsiung Normal University,Kaohsiung,Taiwany National Lien-Ho Institute of Technology,Miao Li,Taiwanz National Taiwan University,Taipei,Taiwanaa H.Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics,Krakow,Polandab Nihon Dental College,Niigata,Japanac Niigata University,Niigata,Japanad Osaka City University,Osaka,Japanae Osaka University,Osaka,Japanaf Panjab University,Chandigarh,Indiaag Peking University,Beijing,PR Chinaah Princeton University,Princeton,NJ,USAai RIKEN BNL Research Center,Brookhaven,NY,USAaj Saga University,Saga,Japanak University of Science and Technology of China,Hefei,PR ChinaaℓSeoul National University,Seoul,South Koreaam Sungkyunkwan University,Suwon,South Koreaan University of Sydney,Sydney,NSW,Australiaao Tata Institute of Fundamental Research,Bombay,Indiaap Toho University,Funabashi,Japanaq Tohoku Gakuin University,Tagajo,Japanar Tohoku University,Sendai,Japanas University of Tokyo,Tokyo,Japanat Tokyo Institute of Technology,Tokyo,Japanau Tokyo Metropolitan University,Tokyo,Japanav Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology,Tokyo,Japanaw Toyama National College of Maritime Technology,Toyama,Japanay University of Tsukuba,Tsukuba,Japanaz Utkal University,Bhubaneswer,Indiaba Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,Blacksburg,VA,USAbb Yokkaichi University,Yokkaichi,Japanbc Yonsei University,Seoul,South KoreaB events collected with the Belle detector at KEKB.Thebranching fractions B(B+→ρ0π+)=(8.0+2.3+0.7−2.0−0.7)×10−6and B(B0→ρ±π∓)=(20.8+6.0+2.8−6.3−3.1)×10−6are obtained.In addition,a90%confidence level upper limitof B(B0→ρ0π0)<5.3×10−6is reported.Key words:ρπ,branching fractionPACS:13.25.hw,14.40.Nd1on leave from Nova Gorica Polytechnic,Nova Gorica,Sloveniamodes are examined.Here and throughout the text,inclusion of charge con-jugate modes is implied and for the neutral decay,B0→ρ±π∓,the notation implies a sum over both the modes.The data sample used in this analysis was taken by the Belle detector[9]at KEKB[10],an asymmetric storage ring that collides8GeV electrons against3.5GeV positrons.This produces Υ(4S)mesons that decay into B0B pairs.The Belle detector is a general purpose spectrometer based on a1.5T su-perconducting solenoid magnet.Charged particle tracking is achieved with a three-layer double-sided silicon vertex detector(SVD)surrounded by a central drift chamber(CDC)that consists of50layers segmented into6axial and5 stereo super-layers.The CDC covers the polar angle range between17◦and 150◦in the laboratory frame,which corresponds to92%of the full centre of mass(CM)frame solid angle.Together with the SVD,a transverse momen-tum resolution of(σp t/p t)2=(0.0019p t)2+(0.0030)2is achieved,where p t is in GeV/c.Charged hadron identification is provided by a combination of three devices: a system of1188aerogelˇCerenkov counters(ACC)covering the momentum range1–3.5GeV/c,a time-of-flight scintillation counter system(TOF)for track momenta below1.5GeV/c,and dE/dx information from the CDC for particles with very low or high rmation from these three devices is combined to give the likelihood of a particle being a kaon,L K,or pion, Lπ.Kaon-pion separation is then accomplished based on the likelihood ratio Lπ/(Lπ+L K).Particles with a likelihood ratio greater than0.6are identified as pions.The pion identification efficiencies are measured using a high momentum D∗+data sample,where D∗+→D0π+and D0→K−π+.With this pion selection criterion,the typical efficiency for identifying pions in the momentum region0.5GeV/c<p<4GeV/c is(88.5±0.1)%.By comparing the D∗+data sample with a Monte Carlo(MC)sample,the systematic error in the particle identification(PID)is estimated to be1.4%for the mode with three charged tracks and0.9%for the modes with two.Surrounding the charged PID devices is an electromagnetic calorimeter(ECL) consisting of8736CsI(Tl)crystals with a typical cross-section of5.5×5.5cm2 at the front surface and16.2X0in depth.The ECL provides a photon energy resolution of(σE/E)2=0.0132+(0.0007/E)2+(0.008/E1/4)2,where E is in GeV.Electron identification is achieved by using a combination of dE/dx measure-ments in the CDC,the response of the ACC and the position and shape of the electromagnetic shower from the ECL.Further information is obtained from the ratio of the total energy registered in the calorimeter to the particle momentum,E/p lab.Charged tracks are required to come from the interaction point and have transverse momenta above100MeV/c.Tracks consistent with being an elec-tron are rejected and the remaining tracks must satisfy the pion identification requirement.The performance of the charged track reconstruction is studied using high momentumη→γγandη→π+π−π0decays.Based on the relative yields between data and MC,we assign a systematic error of2%to the single track reconstruction efficiency.Neutral pion candidates are detected with the ECL via their decayπ0→γγ. Theπ0mass resolution,which is asymmetric and varies slowly with theπ0 energy,averages toσ=4.9MeV/c2.The neutral pion candidates are selected fromγγpairs by requiring that their invariant mass to be within3σof the nominalπ0mass.To reduce combinatorial background,a selection criteria is applied to the pho-ton energies and theπ0momenta.Photons in the barrel region are required to have energies over50MeV,while a100MeV requirement is made for photons in the end-cap region.Theπ0candidates are required to have a momentum greater than200MeV/c in the laboratory frame.Forπ0s from BE2beam−p2B and the energy difference∆E=E B−E beam.Here, p B and E B are the momentum and energy of a B candidate in the CM frame and E beam is the CM beam energy.An incorrect mass hypothesis for a pion or kaon produces a shift of about46MeV in∆E,providing extra discrimination between these particles.The width of the M bc distributions is primarily due to the beam energy spread and is well modelled with a Gaussian of width 3.3MeV/c2for the modes with a neutral pion and2.7MeV/c2for the mode without.The∆E distribution is found to be asymmetric with a small tail on the lower side for the modes with aπ0.This is due toγinteractions withmaterial in front of the calorimeter and shower leakage out of the calorimeter. The∆E distribution can be well modelled with a Gaussian when no neutral particles are present.Events with5.2GeV/c2<M bc<5.3GeV/c2and|∆E|< 0.3GeV are selected for thefinal analysis.The dominant background comes from continuum e+e−→qB events and jet-like qi,j|p i||p j|P l(cosθij)i,k|p i||p k|,r l=),where L s and L qqD0π+ decays.By comparing the yields in data and MC after the likelihood ratiorequirement,the systematic errors are determined to be4%for the modes with aπ0and6%for the mode without.Thefinal variable used for continuum suppression is theρhelicity angle,θh, defined as the angle between the direction of the decay pion from theρin the ρrest frame and theρin the B rest frame.The requirement of|cosθh|>0.3 is made independently of the likelihood ratio as it is effective in suppressing the background from B decays as well as the qB events is used[14].The largest component of this background is found to come from decays of the type B→Dπ;when the D meson decays via D→π+π−,events can directly reach the signal region while the decay D→K−π+can reach the signal region with the kaon misidentified as a pion.Decays with J/ψandψ(2S) mesons can also populate the signal region if both the daughter leptons are misidentified as pions.These events are excluded by making requirements on the invariant mass of the intermediate particles:|M(π+π−)−M D0|>0.14 GeV/c2,|M(π+π0)−M D+|>0.05GeV/c2,|M(π+π−)−M J/ψ|>0.07GeV/c2 and|M(π+π−)−Mψ(2S)|>0.05GeV/c2.The widest cut is made around the D0mass to account for the mass shift due to misidentifying the kaons in D0 decays as pions.Fig.1shows the∆E and M bc distributions for the three modes analysed after all the selection criteria have been applied.The∆E and M bc plots are shown for events that lie within3σof the nominal M bc and∆E values,respectively. The signal yields are obtained by performing maximum likelihoodfits,each using a single signal function and one or more background functions.The signal functions are obtained from the MC and adjusted based on comparisons of B+→B0are assumed to be equal.The M bc distribution for all modes isfitted with a single Gaussian and an ARGUS background function[15].The normalization of the ARGUS function is left tofloat and shape of the function isfixed from the∆E sideband:−0.25 GeV<∆E<−0.08GeV and5.2GeV/c2<M bc<5.3GeV/c2.For the mode with only charged pions in thefinal state,the∆E distribution isfitted with a single Gaussian for the signal and a linear function withfixed shape for the continuum background.The normalization of the linear function is left to float and the slope isfixed from the M bc sideband,5.2GeV/c2<M bc<5.26GeV/c2,|∆E|<0.3GeV.There are also other rare B decays that are expected to contaminate the∆E distribution.For the mode without aπ0,these modes are of the type B0→h+h−(where h denotes aπor K),B→ρρ(including all combinations of charged and neutralρmesons,where the polarizations of theρmesons are assumed to be longitudinal)and B→Kππ(including the decays B+→ρ0K+,B+→K∗0π+,B+→K∗0(1430)0π+,B+→f0(980)K+ and B+→f0(1370)K+)[16].These background modes are accounted for by using smoothed histograms whose shapes have been determined by combining MC distributions.The three B→ρρmodes are combined into one histogram. The normalization of this component is allowed tofloat in thefit due to the uncertainty in the branching fractions of the B→ρρmodes.Likewise,the B→hh and all the B→Kππmodes are combined to form one hh and one Kππcomponent.The normalizations of these components arefixed to their expected yields,which are calculated using efficiencies determined by MC and branching fractions measured by previous Belle analyses[16,17].The∆Efits for the modes with aπ0in thefinal state have the signal compo-nent modelled by a Crystal Ball function[18]to account for the asymmetry in the∆E distribution.As for the B+→ρ0π+mode,the continuum background is modelled by a linear function withfixed slope.Unlike the B+→ρ0π+mode, a component is included for the background from the b→c transition.The pa-rameterization for rare B decays includes one component for the B→Kππ0 modes(B0→ρ+K−and B0→K∗+π−)[19]and one for all the B→ρρmodes.The normalization of the B→ρρcomponent is left tofloat while the other components from B decays arefixed to their expected yields.Table1summarizes the results of the∆Efits,showing the number of events, signal yields,reconstruction efficiencies,statistical significance and branching fractions or upper limits for eachfit.The statistical significance is defined assystematic error in thefitted signal yield is estimated by independently varying eachfixed parameter in thefit by1σ.Thefinal results are B(B+→ρ0π+)=(8.0+2.3+0.7−2.0−0.7)×10−6and B(B0→ρ±π∓)=(20.8+6.0+2.8−6.3−3.1)×10−6where thefirst error is statistical and the second is systematic.For theρ0π0mode,one standard deviation of the systematic error is added to the statistical limit to obtain a conservative upper limit at90%confidence of5.3×10−6.The possibility of a nonresonant B→πππbackground is also examined.To check for this type of background,the M bc and∆E yields are determined for differentππinvariant mass bins.Byfitting the M bc distribution inππinvariant mass bins with B→ρπand B→πππMC distributions,the nonresonant contribution is found to be below4%.To account for this possible background, errors3.7%and3.2%are added in quadrature to the systematic errors of the ρ+π−andρ0π+modes,respectively.Theππinvariant mass distributions are shown in Fig.2.Two plots are shown for theρ+π−andρ0π+modes,one with events from the M bc sideband superimposed over the events from the signal region(upper)and one with events from signal MC superimposed over events from the signal region with the sideband subtracted(lower).Fig.3 shows the distribution of the helicity variable,cosθh,for the two modes with all selection criteria applied except the helicity condition.Events fromρπdecays are expected to follow a cos2θdistribution while nonresonant and other background decays have an approximately uniform distribution.The helicity plots are obtained byfitting the M bc distribution in eight helicity bins ranging from−1to1.The M bc yield is then plotted against the helicity bin for each mode and the expected MC signal distributions are superimposed.Both the ππmass spectrum and the helicity distributions provide evidence that the signal events are consistent with being fromρπdecays.The results obtained here can be used to calculate the ratio of branching frac-tions R=B(B0→ρ±π∓)/B(B+→ρ0π+),which gives R=2.6±1.0±0.4, where thefirst error is statistical and second is systematic.This is consistent with values obtained by CLEO[20]and BaBar[21,22]as shown in Table2. Theoretical calculations done at tree level assuming the factorization approx-imation for the hadronic matrix elements give R∼6[3].Calculations that include penguin contributions,off-shell B∗excited states or additionalππres-onances[4–8]might yield better agreement with the the measured value of R.In conclusion,statistically significant signals have been observed in the B→ρπmodes using a31.9×106BWe wish to thank the KEKB accelerator group for the excellent operation of the KEKB accelerator.We acknowledge support from the Ministry of Ed-ucation,Culture,Sports,Science,and Technology of Japan and the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science;the Australian Research Council and the Australian Department of Industry,Science and Resources;the National Science Foundation of China under contract No.10175071;the Department of Science and Technology of India;the BK21program of the Ministry of Education of Korea and the CHEP SRC program of the Korea Science and Engineering Foundation;the Polish State Committee for Scientific Research under contract No.2P03B17017;the Ministry of Science and Technology of the Russian Federation;the Ministry of Education,Science and Sport of the Republic of Slovenia;the National Science Council and the Ministry of Education of Taiwan;and the U.S.Department of Energy.References[1] A.E.Snyder and H.R.Quinn,Phys.Rev.D48,2139(1993).[2]I.Bediaga,R.E.Blanco,C.G¨o bel,and R.M´e ndez-Galain,Phys.Rev.Lett.81,4067(1998).[3]M.Bauer,B.Stech,and M.Wirbel,Z.Phys.C34,103(1987).[4] A.Deandrea et al.,Phys.Rev.D62,036001(2000).[5]Y.H.Chen,H.Y.Cheng,B.Tseng and K.C.Yang,Phys.Rev.D60,094014(1999).[6] C.D.Lu and M.Z.Yang,Eur.Phys.J C23,275(2002).[7]J.Tandean and S.Gardner,SLAC-PUB-9199;hep-ph/0204147.[8]S.Gardner and Ulf-G.Meißner,Phys.Rev.D65,094004(2002).[9]Belle Collaboration,A.Abashian et al.,Nucl.Instr.and Meth.A479,117(2002).[10]E.Kikutani ed.,KEK Preprint2001-157(2001),to appear in Nucl.Instr.andMeth.A.[11]G.C.Fox and S.Wolfram,Phys.Rev.Lett.41,1581(1978).[12]This modification of the Fox-Wolfram moments wasfirst proposed in a seriesof lectures on continuum suppression at KEK by Dr.R.Enomoto in May and June of1999.For a more detailed description see Belle Collaboration,K.Abe et al.,Phys.Lett.B511,151(2001).[13]CLEO Collaboration,D.M.Asner et al.,Phys.Rev.D53,1039(1996).[14]These MC events are generated with the CLEO group’s QQ program,see/public/CLEO/soft/QQ.The detector response is simulated using GEANT,R.Brun et al.,GEANT 3.21,CERN Report DD/EE/84-1,1984.[15]The ARGUS Collaboration,H.Albrecht et al.,Phys.Lett.B241,278(1990).[16]Belle Collaboration,A.Garmash et al.,Phys.Rev.D65,092005(2002).[17]Belle Collaboration,K.Abe et al.,Phys.Rev.Lett.87,101801(2001).[18]J.E.Gaiser et al.,Phys.Rev.D34,711(1986).[19]Belle Collaboration,K.Abe et al.,BELLE-CONF-0115,submitted as acontribution paper to the2001International Europhysics Conference on High Energy Physics(EPS-HEP2001).[20]CLEO Collaboration,C.P.Jessop et al.,Phys.Rev.Lett.85,2881(2000).[21]Babar Collaboration,B.Aubert et al.,submitted as a contribution paper tothe20th International Symposium on Lepton and Photon Interactions at High Energy(LP01);hep-ex/0107058.[22]BaBar Collaboration,B.Aubert et al.,submitted as a contribution paper tothe XXXth International Conference on High Energy Physics(ICHEP2000);hep-ex/0008058.Table1∆Efit results.Shown for each mode are the number of events in thefit,the signal yield,the reconstruction efficiency,the branching fraction(B)or90%confidence level upper limit(UL)and the statistical significance of thefit.Thefirst error in the branching fraction is statistical,the second is systematic.ρ0π+15424.3+6.9−6.29.68.0+2.3+0.7−2.0−0.74.4σρ+π−30144.6+12.8−13.46.820.8+6.0+2.8−6.3−3.13.7σρ0π0116−4.4±8.58.5<5.3-Experiment B(B0→ρ±π∓)×10−6B(B+→ρ0π+)×10−6RE v e n t s /16 M e VE v e n t s /3 M e V /c2(b) ρ0π+Signal backgrd02.557.51012.51517.52022.55.25.225 5.25 5.2755.3E v e n t s /18 M e VE v e n t s /2 M e V /c2(d) ρ+π-Signal backgrd051015202530355.25.225 5.25 5.2755.3∆E(GeV)E v e n t s /18 M e V(e) ρ0π024681012-0.2-0.10.10.2(GeV/c 2)E v e n t s /2 M e V /c2M bc (f) ρ0πSignal backgrd02468101214165.25.225 5.25 5.2755.3Fig.1.The ∆E (left)and M bc (right)fits to the three B →ρπmodes:ρ0π+,ρ+π−and ρ0π0.The histograms show the data,the solid lines show the total fit and the dashed lines show the continuum component.In (a)the contribution from the B →ρρand B →hh modes is shown by the cross hatched component.In (c)the cross hatched component shows the contribution from the b →c transition and B →ρρmodes.102030405060+0(GeV/c 2)E v e n t s /0.1 G e V /c2M(π+π0)(GeV/c 2)E v e n t s /0.1 G e V /c2(GeV/c 2)E v e n t s /0.1 G e V /c2+-(GeV/c 2)E v e n t s /0.1 G e V /c2M(π+ π-)510152025Fig.2.The M (ππ)distributions for B 0→ρ±π∓(left)and B +→ρ0π+(right)events in the signal region.Plots (a)and (b)show sideband events superimposed;plots (c)and (d)show the sideband subtracted plots with signal MC superimposed.-1-0.500.51M b c y i e l d (E v e n t s )cos θh-1-0.500.51M b c y i e l d (E v e n t s )cos θhFig.3.The ρmeson helicity distributions for B 0→ρ±π∓(a)and B +→ρ0π+(b).Signal MC distributions are shown superimposed.。
Conjugation vs hyperconjugation in molecular structure of acroleinSvitlana V.Shishkina a ,⇑,Anzhelika I.Slabko b ,Oleg V.Shishkin a ,caDivision of Functional Materials Chemistry,SSI ‘Institute for Single Crystals’,National Academy of Science of Ukraine,60Lenina Ave.,Kharkiv 61001,Ukraine bDepartment of Technology of Plastic Masses,National Technical University ‘Kharkiv Polythechnic Institute’,21Frunze Str.,Kharkiv 61002,Ukraine cDepartment of Inorganic Chemistry,V.N.Karazin Kharkiv National University,4Svobody Sq.,Kharkiv 61077,Ukrainea r t i c l e i n f o Article history:Received 4August 2012In final form 16November 2012Available online 29November 2012a b s t r a c tAnalysis of geometric parameters of butadiene and acrolein reveals the contradiction between the Csp 2–Csp 2bond length in acrolein and classical concept of conjugation degree in the polarized molecules.In this Letter the reasons of this contradiction have been investigated.It is concluded that the Csp 2–Csp 2bond length in acrolein is determined by influence of the bonding for it p –p conjugation and antibonding n ?r ⁄hyperconjugation between the oxygen lone pair and the antibonding orbital of the single bond.It was shown also this bond length depends on the difference in energy of conjugative and hyperconjuga-tive interactions.Ó2012Elsevier B.V.All rights reserved.1.IntroductionButadiene and acrolein belong to the most fundamental mole-cules in the organic chemistry.They are canonical objects for the investigation of phenomena of p –p conjugation between double bonds and polarization of p -system by heteroatom [1].According to many experimental [2–16]as well as theoretical studies [13,17–23]the molecular structure of butadiene is determined by conjugation between p -orbitals of two double bonds and may be described as superposition of two resonance structures (Scheme 1).The presence of zwitterionic structure causes the shortening of the central single Csp 2–Csp 2bond as compare with similar unconjugated bond [24].Acrolein differs from butadiene by presence of the oxygen atom instead terminal methylene group.According to classical concepts of organic chemistry such replacement should causes polarization of p -system due to presence of highly polar C @O bond [25].This leads to significant increase of the contribution of the zwitterionic resonance structure (Scheme 1)reflecting strengthening of conju-gation between p -systems of double bonds.Therefore the central Csp 2–Csp 2bond must be shorter in acrolein as compared with one in butadiene.However numerous investigations of acrolein by experimental [26–28]and theoretical methods [26,27,29–36]demonstrate an opposite situation:the Csp 2–Csp 2bond length varies within the range 1.469Ä1.481Åin acrolein as compared with 1.454Ä1.467in butadiene.Based on these data one can conclude that conjugation between double bonds in acrolein is weaker than in butadiene.At that time the rotation barrier obtained from quan-tum-chemical calculations is higher in acrolein [26,27],confirming stronger conjugation between double bonds.Thus,results of experimental and theoretical investigations demonstrate the con-tradiction between the strengthening of the conjugation in acrolein as compare with butadiene and the values of the Csp 2–Csp 2bond length in these molecules.Recently such illogical situation was observed also in derivatives of cyclohexene containing conjugated endocyclic and exocyclic double bonds [37].It was assumed that elongation of the Csp 2–Csp 2bond in cycloxen-2-enone as compare with one in 3-methylene-cyclohexene is caused by the influence of n ?r ⁄hyperconjugation.In this Letter we demonstrate the results of the investigation of intramolecular interactions in butadiene and acrolein which ex-plain the experimentally observed contradiction between the length of the Csp 2–Csp 2bond and degree of conjugation in acrolein.2.Method of calculationsThe structures of all investigated molecules were optimized using second-order Møller-Plesset perturbation theory [38].The standard aug-cc-pvtz basis set [39]was applied.The character of stationary points on the potential energy surface was verified by calculations of vibrational frequencies within the harmonic approximation using analytical second derivatives at the same level of theory.All stationary points possess zero (minima)or one (saddle points)imaginary frequencies.The verification of the calculation method was performed using optimization of butadi-ene and acrolein by MP2/aug-cc-pvqz,CCSD(T)/cc-pvtz and CCSD(T)/6-311G(d,p)methods [40].The geometry of saddle points for the rotation process was lo-cated using standard optimization technique [41].The barrier of the rotation in all molecules was calculated as the difference be-tween the Gibbs free energies at 298K of the most stable s-trans0009-2614/$-see front matter Ó2012Elsevier B.V.All rights reserved./10.1016/j.cplett.2012.11.032Corresponding author.Fax:+3805723409339.E-mail address:sveta@ (S.V.Shishkina).conformer and saddle-point conformation.All calculations were performed using the G AUSSIAN 03program [42].The intramolecular interactions were investigated within the Natural Bonding Orbitals theory [43]with N BO 5.0program [44].Calculations were performed using B3LYP/aug-cc-pvtz wave func-tion obtained from single point calculations by G AUSSIAN 03program.The conjugation and hyperconjugation interactions are referred to as ‘delocalization’corrections to the zeroth-order natural Lewis structure.For each donor N BO (i )and acceptor N BO (j ),the stabiliza-tion energy E (2)associated with delocalization (‘2e-stabilization’)i ?j is estimated asE ð2Þ¼D E ij ¼q iF ði ;j Þ22j À2i;where q i is the donor orbital occupancy,e j and e i are the diagonal elements (orbital energies),and F (i,j )is the off-diagonal N BO Fock matrix element.3.Results and discussionThe equilibrium geometry of s-trans and s-cis conformers of butadiene and acrolein calculated by MP/aug-cc-pvtz method (Ta-ble 2)agrees very well with obtained earlier results [2–23,25–34]and data of higher and more computationally expensive methods (Table 1).It can be noted that the C–C bond length in acrolein(Tables 1and 2)is longer as compared with butadiene in all sta-tionary points on the potential energy surface.Such relation does not agree with the conception of the resonance theory [45–47].Analysis of intramolecular interactions in both molecules using N BO theory indicates that acrolein differs from butadiene by pres-ence of intramolecular interaction between lone pair of the oxygen atom and antibonding orbital of the C–C bond (Figure 1)as well as the polarization of one double bond containing more electronega-tive ually the interactions between lone pair and antibonding orbital of single bond are stronger than the interac-tions between the C–H bond and antibonding orbital [48]and they can influence geometrical characteristics.Such type of interactions is named by anomeric effect and it is studied very well for the case when the central bond between interacted orbitals is single [48,49].It is investigated in details [49]an influence of classical anomeric effect on conformation of the substituents about central single bond as well as on values of bond lengths.In the case of hyperconjugation interactions along double bond in acrolein orien-tation of substituents around it is determined by its double charac-ter.Therefore,n ?r ⁄hyperconjugative interaction can influence on the bond lengths of interacted ones only.It can assume the dou-ble character of the central bond must also promote some strengthening of this influence due to shorter distance between the lone pair of the oxygen atom and antibonding orbital of the C–C bond.Results of N BO analysis of intramolecular interactions in butadi-ene and acrolein demonstrate that the energy of n ?r ⁄interaction between lone pair of the oxygen atom and antibonding orbital of the C–C bond in acrolein is twice as high of the energy of r ?r ⁄interaction between the C–H bond and antibonding orbital of the C–C bond in butadiene (Table 2).At that time the energy of n ?r ⁄interaction is close enough to the energy of p –pTable 2The equilibrium geometries (bond lengths,Åand C @C–C @X (X =CH 2,O)torsion angle,deg.),transition state of the rotation process,bond length alternation (BLA)parameter,related energy (D E rel ,kcal/mol),related stability (D G 298,kcal/mol)and energy of strongest intramolecular interactions (E (2),kcal/mol)for butadiene and acrolein optimized by MP2/aug-cc-pvtz method.The wave function calculated by b3lyp/aug-cc-pvtz method was used for N BO analysis.ConformerBond lengths (Å)C @C–C @X torsion angle deg.BLA (Å)D E rel(kcal/mol)D G 298(kcal/mol)E (2)(kcal/mol)C @CC–C C @X p –pn ?r ⁄(C–C)r ?r ⁄(C–C)Butadiene s-trans 1.341 1.453 1.340180.0+0.1120030.74–8.67gauche 1.340 1.465 1.34036.8+0.125 2.83 2.8921.04–8.94TS 1.3361.4801.336101.8+0.1446.446.102.32–10.66Acrolein s-trans 1.339 1.469 1.219180.0+0.1300027.7518.06–s-cis 1.338 1.481 1.2190.0+0.143 2.26 2.2224.6319.05–TS1.334 1.492 1.21692.5+0.1588.017.46–18.78–Acrolein +BH 3s-trans 1.341 1.449 1.235180.0+0.1080033.12 2.4511.43s-cis 1.340 1.460 1.2340.0+0.120 2.45 2.3829.61 2.6011.43TS1.334 1.476 1.23193.7+0.1429.258.61–2.3911.55Table 1The Csp 2–Csp 2bond length in butadiene and acrolein optimized by different quantum-chemical methods.Method of calculationCsp 2–Csp 2bond length (Å)D (Csp 2–Csp 2)(Å)ButadieneAcrolein MP2/aug-cc-pvtz 1.453 1.4690.016MP2/aug-cc-pvqz 1.451 1.4670.016CCSD(T)/cc-pvtz1.461 1.4780.017CCSD(T)/6–311G(d,p)1.4681.4870.019S.V.Shishkina et al./Chemical Physics Letters 556(2013)18–2219conjugation between two double bonds.Therefore it can assume that the influence of p–p conjugation and n?r⁄hyperconjuga-tion on the C–C bond length should be comparable.However two strongest intramolecular interactions in the acrolein differ from each other:p–p conjugation between double bonds causes the shortening of the C–C bond in contrary to n?r⁄hyperconjugation which leads to the elongation of the C–C bond owing to the popu-lation of its antibonding orbital.Taking into account this situation it is possible to conclude that length of the Csp2–Csp2single bond in acrolein is determined by balance of two opposite factors namely p–p conjugation and n?r⁄hyperconjugation which may be considered as bonding and antibonding interactions for this bond(Figure1).In this case the length of the Csp2–Csp2bond in acrolein depends on the con-tribution of each of these factors.The changing of the delocaliza-tion of the structures due to influence of intramolecular interactions can be analyzed easier by mean of the bond length alternation(BLA)parameter(Table2).The analysis of BLA shows the presence of n?r⁄hyperconjugative interaction in acrolein what results in the increasing of alternation of double bonds as compare with butadiene.Clear estimation of influence of both interactions on geometri-cal parameters of molecule may be performed by comparison of properties of single C–C bond and BLA parameter in equilibrium s-trans conformation and in situations where one or both intramo-lecular interactions are absent.It is well known that p–p conjugation between double bonds decreases appreciably up to disappearing(in acrolein)in the tran-sition state for the rotation around single bond process(Figure2). The data of N BO analysis for butadiene and acrolein in the transition state confirm this evidence(Table2).As expected the absence of p–p conjugation results in the elongation of the Csp2–Csp2bond and increasing of BLA as compare with equilibrium geometry.At that time single C–C bond remains longer in the transition state for acrolein as compare with one for butadiene’s transition state.1.4921.4691.4491.476π−π is present n σ* is presentπ−π is absentn σ* is absent without π−πwithout n σ∗Figure2.Influence of p–p⁄conjugation and n?r⁄hyperconjugation on the C–Cbond length in acrolein.Table3The energy(E(2),kcal/mol)of the conjugative(bonding)and hyperconjugative(antibonding)intramolecular interactions influencing the Csp2–Csp2bond length in butadiene, acrolein and its complex with BH3.Molecule Bonding interactions E(2)(kcal/mol)Antibonding interactions E(2)(kcal/mol)Butadienes-trans BD(2)C1-C2–BD(2)C3-C430.74BD(1)C1-H5–BD(1)C2-C38.67 BD(1)C2-H7–BD(1)C3-H87.68BD(1)C4-H9–BD(1)C2-C38.67 gauche BD(2)C1-C2–BD(2)C3-C421.04BD(1)C1-H5–BD(1)C2-C38.94 BD(1)C2-H7–BD(1)C3-C4 5.36BD(1)C4-H9–BD(1)C2-C39.01BD(1)C3-H8–BD(1)C1-C2 5.36TS BD(1)C1-C2–BD(1)C3-C4 3.5BD(1)C1-H5–BD(1)C2-C310.66 BD(1)C1-C2–BD(2)C3-C4 3.46BD(1)C4-H9–BD(1)C2-C310.66BD(1)C3-C4–BD(2)C1-C2 3.46BD(2)C1-C2–BD(2)C3-C4 2.32BD(1)C3-H8–BD(2)C1-C29.57BD(1)C2-H7–BD(2)C3-C49.57Acroleins-trans BD(1)C1-C2–BD(1)C3-O4 2.73BD(1)C1-H5–BD(1)C2-C38.25 BD(2)C1-C2–BD(2)C3-O427.75LP(2)O4–BD(1)C2-C318.06BD(1)C2-H7–BD(1)C3-H8 5.95s-cis BD(2)C1-C2–BD(2)C3-O424.63BD(1)C1-H5–BD(1)C2-C38.76 BD(1)C2-H7–BD(1)C3-O4 4.05LP(2)O4–BD(1)C2-C319.05BD(1)C3-H8–BD(1)C1-C2 5.01TS BD(1)C1-C2–BD(2)C3-O4 2.98BD(1)C1-H5–BD(1)C2-C39.07 BD(1)C3-O4–BD(2)C1-C2 4.48LP(2)O4–BD(1)C2-C318.78BD(1)C3-H8–BD(2)C1-C2 5.85BD(1)C2-H7–BD(2)C3-O4 6.16Acrolein+BH3s-trans BD(1)C1-C2–BD(1)C3-O4 3.07BD(1)C1-H6–BD(1)C2-C38.09 BD(2)C1-C2–BD(2)C3-O433.12BD(1)C2-C3–BD(1)O4-B511.43BD(1)C2-H8–BD(1)C3-H9 5.97LP(1)O4–BD(1)C2-C3 2.45 s-cis BD(1)C1-C2–BD(1)C3-H9 4.98BD(1)C1-H6–BD(1)C2-C38.51 BD(2)C1-C2–BD(2)C3-O429.61BD(1)C2-C3–BD(1)O4-B511.43BD(1)C2-H8–BD(1)C3-O4 4.41LP(1)O4–BD(1)C2-C3 2.60 TS BD(1)C1-C2–BD(1)C3-O40.55BD(1)C1-H6–BD(1)C2-C39.05 BD(1)C1-C2–BD(2)C3-O4 3.01BD(1)C2-C3–BD(1)O4-B511.55BD(2)C1-C2–BD(1)C3-O4 4.90LP(1)O4–BD(1)C2-C3 2.39BD(1)C3-H9–BD(2)C1-C2 6.13BD(1)C2-H8–BD(2)C3-O4 6.8820S.V.Shishkina et al./Chemical Physics Letters556(2013)18–22It is additional argument about the influence of n?r⁄hypercon-jugation on the C–C bond length through the C@O double bond.In contrary to p–p conjugation n?r⁄hyperconjugation is present in all stationary points on the potential energy surface for acrolein(Table2).But this interaction can be shielded by for-mation of dative bond involving lone pair of the oxygen atom and unoccupied orbital of Lewis acid,for example,BH3.The formed O–B bond has r-character and the energy of its interaction with antibonding orbital of the central C–C bond is very close to the en-ergy of similar C–H?r⁄(C–C)interaction in butadiene(Table2). The absence of n?r⁄hyperconjugation results significant short-ening of the Csp2–Csp2bond and decreasing of BLA in all stationary points for acrolein.It is more interesting that the C–C bond in acro-lein becomes shorter and p–p conjugation becomes stronger as compare with ones in butadiene in the case of absence of n?r⁄hyperconjugative interaction(Table2)what agrees well with the resonance theory.This evidence is confirmed also by values of BLA parameter.It is very interesting the situation when both strong intramolec-ular interactions are absent namely acrolein with shielded by BH3 lone pair in the transition state for the rotation process.In absence of p–p conjugative and n?r⁄hyperconjugative interactions the C–C bond length is almost equal to mean value for length of this bond for s-trans and s-cis conformers of acrolein with both interac-tions(Table2).This fact confirms that the C–C bond length in acro-lein in the equilibrium state is determined by balance of p–p conjugation and n?r⁄hyperconjugation.Taking into account the opposite influence of two types of intra-molecular interactions on the C–C bond one may assume that its length depends on the difference in energy of bonding and antibonding interactions for this bond.In such case all bonding for C–C bond and antibonding for it interactions(Table3)must be taken into account.Specially,this is important for transition states where p–p conjugative interaction is minimal and r(c-H)–p interaction appears instead it.This interaction has bond-ing for Csp2–Csp2bond character and it is weaker as compare with p–p interaction.Analysis of relation between C–C bond length and total energy of intramolecular interaction influencing on it demon-strates good correlation between them(Figure3)with correlation coefficient aboutÀ0.93.The barrier of the rotation around ordinary C–C bond is also sensitive to intramolecular interactions.The absence of n?r⁄hyperconjugation in acrolein results the increase of conjugation in molecule what leads to the increase of the rotation barrier (Table2).4.ConclusionsResults of quantum-chemical calculations demonstrate the structure of acrolein does not correspond to conventional views about influence of the polarization of p-system by the oxygen atom.According to classic viewpoint this effect should lead to in-crease of conjugation between double bonds and shortening of central single C–C bond as compared to butadiene.However,anal-ysis of intramolecular interactions shows that the geometry of acrolein is determined by counteraction of p–p conjugation and n?r⁄hyperconjugation.The energies of these interactions are very close but ones influence on the C–C bond lengths in opposite directions.Conjugation promotes the shortening of the central sin-gle bond due to the overlapping of the p-orbitals of two double bonds.In the contrary the n?r⁄hyperconjugation causes the elongation of the C–C bond due to the population of its antibonding orbital.The absence of conjugation in the transition state for the rotation about the C–C bond process results in the elongation of the single bond in conjugated system.In turn the shielding of n?r⁄hyperconjugation by the formation of dative bond between lone pair of oxygen atom and vacant orbital of Lewis acid causes the shortening of the C–C bond in acrolein.The C–C bond length correlates well with the difference between two strong intramolec-ular interactions.The absence of both interactions does not almost change the C–C bond length.Thus,these data clearly indicate that molecular structure of conjugated systems containing heteroatoms is determined by not only p–p conjugation but also by n?r⁄hyperconjugation.References[1]F.A Carey,R.J.Sundberg,Advanced Organic Chemistry.Part A:Structure andMechanisms,Springer,Virginia,2007.[2]Yu.N.Panchenko,Yu.A.Pentin,V.I.Tyulin,V.M.Tatevskii,Opt.Spectrosc.13(1962)488.[3]A.R.H.Cole,G.M.Mohay,G.A.Osborne,Spectrochim.Acta23A(1967)909.[4]K.Kuchitsu,T.Fukuyama,Y.Morino,J.Mol.Struct.1(1967–1968)463.[5]R.L.Lipnick,E.W.Garbisch Jr.,J.Am.Chem.Soc.95(1973)6370.[6]Yu.N.Panchenko,Spectrochim.Acta31A(1975)1201.[7]Yu.N.Panchenko,A.V.Abramenkov,V.I.Mochalov,A.A.Zenkin,G.Keresztury,G.J.Jalsovszky,J.Mol.Spectrosc.99(1983)288.[8]W.Caminati,G.Grassi,A.Bauder,Chem.Phys.Lett.148(1988)13.[9]M.E.Squillacote,T.C.Semple,P.W.Mui,J.Am.Chem.Soc.107(1985)6842.[10]Y.Furukawa,H.Takeuchi,I.Harada,M.Tasumi,Bull.Chem.Soc.Jpn.56(1983)392.[11]B.R.Arnold,V.Balaji,J.W.Downing,J.G.Radziszewski,J.J.Fisher,J.Michl,J.Am.Chem.Soc.113(1991)2910.[12]J.Saltiel,J.-O.Choi,D.F.Sears Jr.,D.W.Eaker,F.B.Mallory,C.W.Mallory,J.Phys.Chem.98(1994)13162.[13]K.W.Wiberg,R.E.Rosenberg,J.Am.Chem.Soc.112(1990)1509.[14]J.Saltiel,D.F.Sears Jr,A.M.Turek,J.Phys.Chem.A105(2001)7569.[15]M.S.Deleuze,S.Knippenberg,J.Chem.Phys.125(2006)104309-1.[16]P.Boopalachandran,N.C.Craig,ane,J.Phys.Chem.A116(2012)271.[17]H.Guo,M.Karplus,J.Chem.Phys.94(1991)3679.[18]R.Hargitai,P.G.Szalay,G.Pongor,G.Fogarasi,J.Mol.Struct.(THEOCHEM)112(1994)293.[19]G.R.De Maré,Yu.N.Panchenko,J.V.Auwera,J.Phys.Chem.A101(1997)3998.[20]J.C.Sancho-García,A.J.Pérez-Jiménez,F.Moscardó,J.Phys.Chem.A105(2001)11541.[21]N.C.Craig,P.Groner,D.C.McKean,J.Phys.Chem.A110(2006)7461.[22]D.Feller,K.A.Peterson,J.Chem.Phys.126(2007)114105.[23]D.Feller,N.C.Craig,A.R.Maltin,J.Phys.Chem.A112(2008)2131.[24]D.Feller,N.C.Craig,J.Phys.Chem.A113(2009)1601.[25]H.-B.Burgi,J.D.Dunitz,Structure Correlation,vol.2,VCH,Weinheim,1994.[26]K.B.Wiberg,R.E.Rosenberg,P.R.Rablen,J.Am.Chem.Soc.113(1991)2890.[27]K.B.Wiberg,P.R.Rablen,M.Marquez,J.Am.Chem.Soc.114(1992)8654.[28]K.Kuchitsu,T.Fukuyama,Y.Morino,J.Mol.Struct.1(1967–1968)463.[29]G.Celebre,M.Concistré,G.DeLuca,M.Longeri,G.Pileio,J.W.Emsley,Chem.Eur.J.11(2005)3599.[30]R.J.Loncharich,T.R.Schwartz,K.N.Houk,J.Am.Chem.Soc.109(1987)14.[31]G.R.DeMare,Yu.N.Panchenko,A.J.Abramenkov,J.Mol.Struct.160(1987)327.S.V.Shishkina et al./Chemical Physics Letters556(2013)18–2221[32]G.R.DeMare,Can.J.Chem.63(1985)1672.[33]Y.Osamura,H.F.Schaefer III,J.Chem.Phys.74(1981)4576.[34]C.E.Bolm,A.Bauder,Chem.Phys.Lett.88(1982)55.[35]B.Mannfors,J.T.Koskinen,L.-O.Pietilä,L.Ahjopalo,J.Mol.Struct.(THEOCHEM)393(1997)39.[36]J.I.García,J.A.Mayoral,L.Salvatella,X.Assfeld,M.F.Ruiz-López,J.Mol.Struct.(THEOCHEM)362(1996)187.[37]S.V.Shishkina,O.V.Shishkin,S.M.Desenko,J.Leszczynski,J.Phys.Chem.A112(2008)7080.[38]C.Møller,M.S.Plesset,Phys.Rev.46(1934)618.[39]R.A.Kendall,T.H.Dunning Jr.,R.J.Harrison,J.Chem.Phys.96(1992)6792.[40]W.H.Hehre,L.Radom,P.V.R.Schleyer,J.A.Pople,Ab initio Molecular OrbitalTheory,Wiley,New York,1986.[41]P.Culot,G.Dive,V.H.Nguyen,J.M.Ghuysen,Theor.Chim.Acta82(1992)189.[42]M.J.Frisch et al.,G AUSSIAN,Inc.,Wallingford CT,2004.[43]F.Weinhold,in:P.V.R.Schleyer,N.L.Allinger,T.Clark,J.Gasteiger,P.A.Kollman,H.F.Schaefer III,P.R.Schreiner(Eds.),Encyclopedia of Computational Chemistry,vol.3,John Wiley&Sons,Chicheste,UK,1998.1792–1792. [44]E.D.Glendening,J.K.Badenhoop,A.E.Reed,J.E.Carpenter,J.A.Bohmann,C.M.Morales,F.Weinhold,N BO5.0Theoretical Chemistry Institute,University of Wisconsin,Madison,WI,2001.[45]E.D.Glendening,F.Weinhold,put.Chem.19(1998)593.[46]E.D.Glendening,F.Weinhold,put.Chem.19(1998)610.[47]E.D.Glendening,J.K.Badenhoop,F.Weinhold,put.Chem.19(1998)628.[48]A.J.Kirby,Stereoelectronic Effects,Oxford University Press,New York,1996.[49]I.V.Alabugin,K.M.Gilmore,P.W.Peterson,WIREs Computational MolecularScience1(2011)109.22S.V.Shishkina et al./Chemical Physics Letters556(2013)18–22。
