Next Article in Journal
Influence of Pyranose and Spacer Arm Structures on Phloem Mobility and Insecticidal Activity of New Tralopyril Derivatives
Previous Article in Journal
Recent Advances in Conotoxin Classification by Using Machine Learning Methods
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Calculation of Five Thermodynamic Molecular Descriptors by Means of a General Computer Algorithm Based on the Group-Additivity Method: Standard Enthalpies of Vaporization, Sublimation and Solvation, and Entropy of Fusion of Ordinary Organic Molecules and Total Phase-Change Entropy of Liquid Crystals

1
Department of Chemistry, University of Basel, Basel 4003, Switzerland
2
Department of Chemistry, University of North Texas, Denton, TX 76203, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Molecules 2017, 22(7), 1059; https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules22071059
Submission received: 22 May 2017 / Revised: 22 June 2017 / Accepted: 22 June 2017 / Published: 25 June 2017

Abstract

:
The calculation of the standard enthalpies of vaporization, sublimation and solvation of organic molecules is presented using a common computer algorithm on the basis of a group-additivity method. The same algorithm is also shown to enable the calculation of their entropy of fusion as well as the total phase-change entropy of liquid crystals. The present method is based on the complete breakdown of the molecules into their constituting atoms and their immediate neighbourhood; the respective calculations of the contribution of the atomic groups by means of the Gauss-Seidel fitting method is based on experimental data collected from literature. The feasibility of the calculations for each of the mentioned descriptors was verified by means of a 10-fold cross-validation procedure proving the good to high quality of the predicted values for the three mentioned enthalpies and for the entropy of fusion, whereas the predictive quality for the total phase-change entropy of liquid crystals was poor. The goodness of fit (Q2) and the standard deviation (σ) of the cross-validation calculations for the five descriptors was as follows: 0.9641 and 4.56 kJ/mol (N = 3386 test molecules) for the enthalpy of vaporization, 0.8657 and 11.39 kJ/mol (N = 1791) for the enthalpy of sublimation, 0.9546 and 4.34 kJ/mol (N = 373) for the enthalpy of solvation, 0.8727 and 17.93 J/mol/K (N = 2637) for the entropy of fusion and 0.5804 and 32.79 J/mol/K (N = 2643) for the total phase-change entropy of liquid crystals. The large discrepancy between the results of the two closely related entropies is discussed in detail. Molecules for which both the standard enthalpies of vaporization and sublimation were calculable, enabled the estimation of their standard enthalpy of fusion by simple subtraction of the former from the latter enthalpy. For 990 of them the experimental enthalpy-of-fusion values are also known, allowing their comparison with predictions, yielding a correlation coefficient R2 of 0.6066.

1. Introduction

The reliable prediction of certain properties/descriptors of a molecule prior to its synthetic preparation has always been the goal of theoretical and experimental scientists, be it that they wanted to focus their experimental working hours on the synthesis of worthwhile compounds, be it that they wanted to verify their experimental results by means of the predictions. Among the many approaches, from the most elaborate ones such as the time-consuming ab initio methods to the fastest semiempirical self-consistent field procedures, one has turned out to be the most versatile and accurate and is not even quantum-theory-related: the atomic group-additivity method. A recent paper [1] demonstrated its versatility in that it enabled the calculation of mutually totally unrelated descriptors such as heat of combustion, solubility, refractivity, polarizability and toxicity by means of one single computer algorithm. This approach marks the endpoint, so to speak, of the various earlier group-additivity methods focusing on specific fields of application such as the prediction of the logPO/W values [2,3], the molar refractivity [4], the molecular polarizability [5,6], or—closer to the present goal—the “simultaneous” evaluation of the logP, the aqueous solubility and the brain/blood distribution ratio logBB using individual parameter sets [7]. It is no secret, however, that the unsuccessful attempts in paper [1] to reliably predict just the latter descriptor, logBB, put a damper on the expectation of a universal applicability of the present atomic group-additivity method. Yet, the exceptionally high prediction quality for the heat of combustion values across the entire structural spectrum of compounds presented in paper [1]—showing a cross-validated correlation coefficient of better than 0.9999 for 1965 compounds—at least gave rise to the hope that this method might successfully be extended to further thermodynamic descriptors.
The standard enthalpies of vaporization and sublimation were the first targets to be examined, not only because of their importance in chemical and environmental science, but also because a great deal of groundwork had already been done by Acree, Jr. and Chickos [8], who collected a large number of experimental vaporization and sublimation data covering more than a century. Several attempts to estimate the standard enthalpies of vaporization and sublimation have already been published: Roux et al. [9] evaluated the standard phase-change enthalpies of molecules from their experimental phase-change enthalpies at any given temperatures using their estimated heat capacity at room temperature. In cases where the number of experimental data was insufficient, they extrapolated the data from compounds with known experimental values. This estimation method, however, was limited to the vaporization enthalpy of liquid hydrocarbons. Similarly, Chickos et al. [10,11] estimated the vaporization enthalpies of larger even-numbered linear n-alkanes from a series of smaller ones [12,13] using their temperature dependence of the gas chromatographic retention time. A further indication of the potential applicability of the group-additivity method to predict the heats of vaporization and sublimation was found in the high correlation of the chain length of the homologues of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids with their experimental values [14].
Determination of the enthalpy of solvation has recently been based on the Abraham solute parameters model [15,16,17,18], the model consisting of a linear equation of five parameters relating to the molecule’s excess molar refraction, the polarity/dipolarity, solute hydrogen-bond acidity and hydrogen-bond basicity, and the McGowan (i.e., molecular) volume. These parameters have been derived from the molecular structure of a series of compounds using multilinear regression analysis and artificial neural networks [19]. Earlier, Cabani et al. [20] described a group-contribution method for the estimation of the enthalpy, Gibbs free energy and heat capacity of liquids of non-ionic solutes in water, limiting the method for the calculation of the group contributions to compounds with not more than one heteroatom and then applying correction parameters for molecules containing more than one heteroatom.
The entropy of fusion (often—and more logically—called entropy of phase change or even better: entropy of melting) of ordinary organic molecules as well as its special manifestation with liquid crystals, called total phase-change entropy, generally mean the entropy of the transition of a molecule from its most stable crystalline form to the isotropic melt. While for ordinary molecules this transition in most cases occurs in one step or two consecutive steps upon addition of thermal energy, this process is much more complex with liquid crystals in that they know several intermediate, semi-crystalline phases melting at considerably different temperatures. In the first case, occurrence of more than one melting step may be explained by polymorphism of the crystalline form, their various polymorphic forms often showing distinct differences in their fusion enthalpies. In the second, the various semi-crystalline forms can be stable over a considerable temperature range, thus consuming a large amount of thermal energy prior to their next phase change. The thermodynamic consequences of the difference in the melting processes between ordinary molecules and compounds exhibiting liquid crystal properties forced Chickos et al. [21] and Acree, Jr. et al. [22] to treat these two categories of compounds as separate entities in their collective volumes.
The present work, being a continuation of the principle to calculate the molecular descriptors published earlier [1], will show the extendability of the approach to reliably predict the enthalpies of vaporization, sublimation and solvation, as well as the entropy of fusion. In order to clearly distinguish the phase-change entropy of ordinary compounds from that of liquid crystals, the term “entropy of fusion” will remain reserved for the former, while for the latter the well-established term “total phase-change entropy” will be used throughout.

2. General Procedure

All the calculations are based on a knowledge database encompassing at present more than 28,500 records, containing the compounds in their geometry-optimized 3D form and carrying all the required (and several more) data. The database includes—besides ordinary organic molecules—organic salts, ionic liquids, liquid crystals and metal-organic compounds.
The algorithm for the calculation of the present descriptors follows the atom-group additivity principle outlined in detail in the earlier paper [1]. Consequently, the naming and meaning of the atom groups in the parameters tables is the same, the tables being complemented by further atom groups, where necessary, following the rules described in Table 1 of [1]. The results of the evaluation of the atom-group contributions are stored in a separate parameters list for each descriptor. The only difference to the earlier work lies in the addition of a further special group as a consequence of attempts to optimize calculations of the group contributions for the entropies of fusion, where it turned out that the difference between the experimental values of open-chained and cyclical compounds was not resolvable by the given ordinary atom groups themselves. Therefore, a special group called “Endocyclic bonds” has been introduced which counts the number of endocyclic bonds in a molecule but is restricted to single bonds to take account of their reduced freedom of mobility within a ring system (bonds of higher order are by themselves restricted). Its treatment within the calculation is identical to the one described for all the other special groups.
Once the group contributions have been evaluated as described earlier, the prediction of the descriptors follows the general Equation (1), where ai and bj are the contributions, Ai is the number of occurrences of the ith atom group, Bj is the number of occurrences of the special groups and C is a constant:
Y = i a i A i + j b j B j + C
It is immediately evident that this equation excludes prediction of descriptors for molecules for which not all atom groups are present in the corresponding parameters table. Yet, a further limitation is given by the condition that only atom groups are valid for consideration that have been represented by at least three independent molecules in the parameters-evaluation process. The number of molecules representing a given atom group is listed in the rightmost column of the parameters tables shown below. The remaining atom groups represented by less than three molecules are kept in the parameters tables solely for future use in this continuing project (and to invite researchers experimenting in these areas to focus on compounds carrying these atom groups). The calculations are generally restricted to molecules containing the elements H, B, C, N, O, P, S, Si and/or halogen.
Plausibility tests have been carried out for each of the atom-group additivity parameters evaluations applying a 10-fold cross-validation procedure as described in [1], making sure that each compound has been used once as a test sample in the process. The results of these calculations are condensed in row A to H at the end of each parameters table. In the corresponding correlation diagrams (Figure 7) and histograms presented below the results of the cross-validation calculations are superpositioned in red over the training data.

3. Results

3.1. General Remarks

(1)
The experimental values of enthalpies and entropies are temperature-dependent. Any relationship within these properties or with other ones only make sense if they are referenced to the same temperature. The usual temperature of reference is 298.15 K, and thus it was ensured in this work that experimental data from literature were only accepted if they had been either measured at or adjusted to the standard temperatur of 298.15 K and standard pressure of 100 kPa.
(2)
All lists of molecules used in the atom-group parameters evaluations have been collected in standard SDF files, stored in the supplementary material, ready to be imported by external chemistry software. The supplementary material also provides the lists of results containing molecule names, experimental, training and cross-validation values. Beyond this, it also contains lists of experimental outliers.

3.2. Enthalpy of Vaporization

Experimental data of vaporization enthalpies have essentially been extracted for this work from the large collection of Acree, Jr. and Chickos [8] and Chickos et al. [10,11,12,13,14], supplemented by recent data from a number of further authors publishing experimental vaporization values of several acetophenones [23], aliphatic tertiary amines [24], azidomethyl-N-nitrooxazolidines [25], benzamides [26], benzocaine [27], bisabolol and menthol [28], crown ethers [29], N,N-dialkyl monoamides [30], fenpropidin and phencyclidine [31], flavors [32], long-chain fluorinated alcohols [33], whiskey- and metha-lactone [34], halogenated fluorenes [35], ibuprofen and naproxen [36], imidazo[1,2-a]pyrazine and phthalazine [37], insect pheromones [38], morpholines [39], organo(thio)phosphates [40], dialkyl phthalates [41], nitrogen heteroaromatics [42], phenylimidazoles [43], 2-acetylthiophene [44], dicarboxylic n-pentyl esters [45], and cyclic amines, ethers and alcohols [46]. The result of the atom-group parameters, based on 3581 compounds, is summarized in Table 1. Several tentative calculations with or without inclusion of certain special groups outlined in Table 2 of the earlier paper [1] revealed a minor improvement of the goodness of fit upon inclusion of the “atom group” responsible for intramolecular acid-base bonds, named “H/H Acceptor”, as well as of those reserved for saturated and unsaturated pure hydrocarbons, called “Alkane/No. of C atoms” and “Unsaturated HC/No. of C atoms”, which add a correction value for each carbon atom.
The total number of atom groups in Table 1, required to take account of the complete set of 3581 molecules for which experimental vaporization data are known, is 302. However, the condition to restrict their applicability to those resting on at least three independent molecules, reduces the number of “valid groups” to 187, as is shown in row A of Table 1. Accordingly, the number of compounds viable for the evaluation of the result of the complete training set and of the test sets in the 10-fold cross-validation calculation was reduced to 3460 and 3381, respectively, as listed in the right-most column. The high correlation coefficients R2 and Q2 of the training and the cross-validated sets (rows B and F) of better than 0.96 and the small difference between them is clear proof of the viability of the present group-additivity model for the prediction of the enthalpy of vaporization. Furthermore, the small standard deviations for the training and test sets of 4.3 and 4.56 (rows D and H) also speaks for the model’s accuracy. In order to put these deviations into perspective with the reality of the experimental practice, a few examples should be given for comparison: the compilation of Acree and Chickos [8] presented eight values for 1-butanol ranging from 48.4 to 55.2 kJ/mol, seven values for methyl t-amyl ether ranging from 33.5 to 35.8 kJ/mol, and four values for ethylenediamine of between 41 and 54.4 kJ/mol. It goes without saying, therefore, that the standard errors of the group-parameters calculations (lines D and H in the parameters table), covering the complete set of available data, are always larger than the individual errors and, thus better reflect the general uncertainty of the experimental data.
The correlation diagram in Figure 1, showing a fairly even distribution of the vaporization data along the regression line, also reveals a narrow overlap of the cross-validated test data with those of the training set. The related histogram in Figure 2, exhibiting a nearly perfect Gaussian bell curve, proves the evenness of the distribution of the deviations of both test and training data about the regression line. The analysis of the distribution of the deviations yielded the following result: 79.2% of the presently 3460 tested compounds deviated by less than or equal to one cross-validated standard error of 4.56 kJ/mol, whereas 6.8% exceeded a deviation of twice that standard error. Beyond this, 32 molecules had to be viewed as outliers as their deviation surpassed by at least four times this standard deviation.
Despite the detailed distinction of the atom groups in Table 1, resulting in an extended list of groups of which about one third is “invalid”, the still large number of “valid” atom groups enabled the calculation of reliable enthalpy-of-vaporization data for 78.2% of the complete set of compounds in the database.

3.3. Enthalpy of Sublimation

The enthalpy of sublimation is the sum of the enthalpies of vaporization and fusion, provided that all of them are referenced to the same temperature. This precondition has been thoroughly followed when selecting experimental data from literature. Again, as in the previous section, the main contribution of experimental sublimation values has been provided by the compendium of Acree, Jr. et al. [8], supplemented by a number of later publications, referencing the heat of sublimation of acetophenones [23], substituted benzamides [26], crown ethers [29], long-chain fluorinated alcohols [33], halogenated fluorenes [35], tricyclic nitrogen heteroaromatics [42], polyphenylbenzenes [47], adamantylideneadamantane [48], cyclic N,N′-thioureas [49], indole-3-carboxylic acids [50], vanillyl alcohol [51], alkanoylphenols [52], adamantanes [53], six-membered ring aliphatics [54], fluoroquinolones [55], oxazolidinones [56], nitrogen-containing substituted adamantanes [57], 2,7-di-t-butylfluorene [58] and nitroimidazoles [59].
The correlation coefficients R2 and Q2 (rows B and F at the bottom of Table 2) exhibit a higher scatter of the experimental data in comparison with the heat-of-vaporization data. The increased uncertainty might be partly ascribed to the fact that in many cases molecules form several crystal structures at different temperatures, having different enthalpies of fusion, and that, therefore, the starting point of the measurements is not clearly defined. In other cases the molecules may not be completely crystalline due to impurities. Another reason may be that while many of the compounds in the enthalpy of the vaporization dataset of the previous chapter are liquid at ambient room temperature and the vaporization measurements have been performed at temperatures not too far removed from 298.15 K, requiring only a small correction back to this reference temperature, the enthalpy of sublimation measurements, on the other hand, are often carried out at higher temperatures where the compounds are more volatile. In these cases, the uncertainty in the correction term needed to extrapolate the experimental value back to the reference temperature is higher and increases with the difference between the experimental and the reference temperature. The consequences of these uncertainties are reflected in the spread of experimental data originating from different authors for the same compounds: for example, for the enthalpy of sublimation of anthracene, there are seven values given in the 2010 Acree and Chickos compilation [8] that range from 88.3 to 93.3 kJ/mol, and for coumarin there are two values for the same property that range from 83.1 to 95.4 kJ/mol.
Figure 3 demonstrates the larger scatter of the data about the regression line, leading to a cross-validated standard deviation of 11.39 (see row H in Table 2), i.e., 2.5 times larger than for the heat of vaporization. Figure 4 visualizes the error distribution, showing that, according to an analysis, 74% of the molecules’ predicted values differ by less one cv-standard deviation and only 5.6% by more than twice that amount. Only 16 compunds had to be declared as outliers because their experimental value exceeded four times the cv-standard deviation. One compound, norcamphor, had to be excluded from calculation because its experimental enthalpy of sublimation was lower than its experimental enthalpy of vaporization, an obviously impossible finding.
The lower number of “valid” atom groups of 154, as shown in row A of Table 2, led to the slightly reduced amount of 75.9% of the molecules in the representative database for which the heat of sublimation was calculable.

3.4. Enthalpy of Fusion

It seems obvious to try to apply the atom-group additivity method as described in the preceding chapters for the prediction of the enthalpy of fusion, all the more as several authors [21,60] have already used this principle very successfully. However, since the presented predictions of the enthalpies of sublimation and vaporization rest exclusively on experimental values at 298 K, it is legitimate to refer to the simple Equation (2) which defines a molecule’s enthalpy of fusion at standard conditions as the difference between its enthalpy of sublimation and its enthalpy of vaporization:
ΔH°fus(298 K) calc. = ΔH°sub(298 K) calc. − ΔH°vap(298 K) calc.
Accordingly, the standard deviation of the thus evaluated enthalpy of fusion can be calculated by means of the error-propagation equation for the sum of two cross-validation standard errors Q2H°sub) (=11.39 kJ/mol) and Q2H°vap) (=4.56 kJ/mol), resulting in a standard deviation σ for the calculated enthalpy of fusion of 12.27 kJ/mol. Evidently, this deviation is largely dominated by the uncertainty of the experimental heats of sublimation and, thus would gain the most upon the provision of more accurate sublimation data.
How well do the predictions of Equation (2) compare to experimental heat-of-fusion data? In order to answer this question more than 1200 experimental values have been inserted into the database, taken from Acree’s compendium publication [8], complemented by recent values for crown ethers [29], fluorinated alcohols [33], adamantanes [53], 2-chloro-3-(trifluoromethyl)pyridine [61], cyanatophenyl derivatives [62], diphenylamines [63], fatty acids [64], pyridinecarbothioamides [65], isoniazid [66] and phenylthiazole-thione [67]. Figure 5 shows a comparison of the experimental with the predicted values, independently calculated by means of Equation (2). After removal of the worst 28 outliers the correlation coefficient R2 for the remaining 990 samples (for which both the experimental and predicted values were available) was calculated to 0.60. This rather low value is at least in part explicable by findings outlined in several papers revealing that for certain compounds experimental values originating from different authors often scatter over a large range. For instance, Eckert et al. [64] graphically demonstrated for various fatty acids that the value of their enthalpy of fusion varied drastically over a period of up to 80 years of repeated examination. Some examples: the enthalpy of fusion for palmitic acid randomly varied over the years between ca. 41 and 60 kJ/mol, and for stearic acid the range, varying between ca. 45 and 74 kJ/mol, was even wider. Analogous observations were made by Leitner and Jurik [68], who discovered similar discrepancies by different authors also for small molecules, exemplified by paracetamol and aspirin, for which the published values varied between 26 and 34.1, and between 29.89 and 32.92 kJ/mol, respectively. Figure 5, also demonstrating that the overwhelming number of experimental data is concentrated in the narrow range of below 40 kJ/mol, provides another explanation for the difficulty to enable exact predictions. The related histogram in Figure 6 nevertheless proves a satisfyingly even distribution of the deviations about the regression line drawn in Figure 5. Thanks to the broad applicability of the “valid” number of atom-group parameters for both the heat of sublimation as well as the heat of vaporization, Equation (2) enabled the estimation of the heat of fusion of 68% of the database’s molecules.

3.5. Enthalpy of Solvation

Literature referencing experimental enthalpy-of-solvation data is relatively scarce. The most yielding source was found in Mintz et al.’s [69] paper on the application of the Abraham model mentioned earlier on gaseous solutes dissolved in water and 1-octanol. Further studies were made on N-methylimidazole [70], urea and its derivatives [71,72,73], thiourea and its derivatives [74], carboxamides and their N-substituted derivatives [75,76,77,78], and uracil and its alkyl-, amino-, nitro- and halosubstituted derivatives [79,80,81,82]. Of the accordingly limited number of 465 compounds having experimental enthalpy-of-solvation values for water as solvent in their datalist, 436 have been entered into the calculation of the atom-group parameters, resulting in 61 valid groups allowing the evaluation of the cross-validated prediction of the solvation enthalpy of 373 compounds with a cv-goodness of fit of 0.9546 and a corresponding standard deviation Q2 of 4.34 kJ/mol as is shown in aggregated manner in Table 3.
Due to the limited number of compounds, the histogram in Figure 7 and Figure 8 reveals a slightly distorted Gaussian bell form. Nevertheless, the analysis of the error distribution reveals that 78.8% of the compounds deviated by less than one cv-standard deviation, whereas for only 5% the deviation was larger than twice this value. The small number of only 61 valid atom groups limited the range of compounds in the database eligible for a heat-of-solvation prediction to 40%. As an informational note, the Abraham model used by Mintz et al. [69] described the enthalpy-of-solvation data of the 369 compounds in their data set to within a standard deviation of 4.04 kJ/mol, which is slightly larger than our standard deviation of 3.53 kJ/mol based on a data set of 388 compounds. Beyond this, of the thermodynamic properties considered here and in the previous paper [1], the Abraham model can only predict enthalpies of solvation.
The observant reader may have noticed that the goodness of fit of the heat-of-solvation calculation is better than that for the heat of sublimation, although the experimental source for the former is the difference between the heat of solution and the heat of sublimation (or vaporization). Hence, one would expect that the uncertainty of the heat of sublimation would be reflected in the goodness of fit of the heat of solvation. The reason as to why this is not the case lies in the nature of the experimental measurements which reduces the chemical diversity: while the determination of the heat of sublimation in principle allows molecules of nearly any size and complexity, the solvation experiments are limited to mostly simple organic liquids and solids having only one, two or three functional groups because these molecules had to exhibit sufficient solubility in water to enable the measurement and they had to readily dissolve within a reasonable amount of time. This precondition eliminated compounds with poor water solubility, in other words many of the larger species. These limitations are also visible in the scope of the experimental enthalpy values: while the range for the heat of sublimation is between about 30 and 330 kJ/mol, for the heat of solvation it is only between about −12 and −150 kJ/mol, i.e., much smaller. It is reasonable to presume that if the solvation experiments would include structurally complex compounds, the correlation deviations would be larger. This size limitation has also a negative effect on the diversity of the atom groups, as can be seen in Table 3, row A, where the number of “valid” groups, available for the calculation of the heat of solvation, is only 61 in relation to 154 (see Table 2, row A) for the heat of sublimation.

3.6. Entropy of Fusion

The entropy of fusion under this subtitle is defined as the entropy change associated with the phase change from the crystalline to the isotropic liquid state of a molecule without passing any intermediate anisotropic, semiliquid phases. In most cases this transition indeed occurs in one stage, but several molecules, on addition of heat, undergo a change from one crystalline phase to a second or even third energetically less stable phase prior to melting. In the following, the entropy-of-fusion values cited in the tables are the sum of all the entropies associated with these solid-solid phase changes including the final solid-liquid phase change. The main source for these values was found in the comprehensive collection of Chickos, Acree and Liebman [21] and in its update [60]. More recent entropy-of-fusion data were found for long-chain fluorinated alcohols [33], halogenated fluorenes [35], di- and tri(cyanatophenyl)alkanes and -silanes [62], 2-cyano-4′-methylbiphenyl [83], diphenyl cyclohexyl-phosphoramidate [84] and 3,4-dinitrofurazanfuroxan [85]. The complete set of compounds with experimental entropy-of-fusion values amounted to a total of 2809 used for the evaluation of the atom-group parameters, yielding 188 valid atom groups. Various tentative calculations including or excluding certain special groups revealed a distinct improvement of the goodness of fit of the optimization process, if the group “Endocyclic bonds” was involved, which counts all single endocyclic bonds in a molecule. However, for small molecules containing small rings this group parameter tended to overcompensate the decrease of freedom of mobility and, therefore, the three special groups “Angle60”, “Angle90” and “Angle102” were added as counter-correctives. The cross-validation calculation with 2637 samples resulted in a very satisfying goodness of fit Q2 of 0.8727 and a standard deviation of 17.93 J/mol/K. In Table 4 the results of these calculations are summarized. Fifty-five compounds had to be removed from the calculations as their experimental values deviated from prediction by more than three times the cv-standard deviation. The large number of valid atom groups, on the other hand, enabled the calculation of the entropy of fusion for 81.8% of the database’s compounds.
The correlation diagram in Figure 9 exhibits a large concentration of the entropy values in the range between 0 and ca. 140 J/mol/K; values of 200 J/mol/K or more are exclusively reserved for molecules carrying long, mostly un-branched methylene or poly-ether chains. The histogram (Figure 10) reveals a slight overweight of the positive deviations, indicating a minor trend to predict too low values.

3.7. Total Phase-Change Entropy of Liquid Crystals

Liquid crystals are a class of molecules characterized by the special feature to often exhibit several distinct semiliquid states between their crystalline and isotropic liquid phases, i.e., anisotropic phases which are stable over an extended temperature range. Depending on their intermediate structure these phases are either called meso, cholesteric, smectic or nematic. This strange self-associative behaviour has typically been found with compounds the molecular structure of which contains rigid moieties and highly flexible pendant alkyl or polyether chains of various length, but also with molecules where certain parts exhibit strong intermolecular hydrogen bonds besides moieties of intermolecular inertness. Due to the variability of their entire melting processes resulting from their structural characteristics, the only common entropy term to possibly be generally applicable is the total phase-change entropy, defined as “the sum of all the entropy changes associated with phase transitions occurring from T = 0 K to the clearing temperature, T = Tiso.” [22]. This definition only differs from the one given for the entropy of fusion in the previous chapter, in that here not only the potential solid–solid entropy-phase changes but also the entropy changes of the semiliquid intermediate phases are considered. Based on this definition, only the total phase-change entropy data of liquid crystals have been entered into the evaluation of the related atom-group parameters. The only source for these data was the large collection of more than 3000 compounds in the compendium work of Acree, Jr. and Chickos [22]. The parameters calculation finally rested on 2686 compounds, yielding a direct goodness of fit R2 of 0.6094 and a cross-validated goodness Q2 of 0.5804 with a standard deviation of 32.79, as condensed at the bottom of Table 5. (In order to compare these data directly with those of the entropy-of-fusion calculation, the special groups “Angle60” and “Angle90” are kept in the parameters list although obviously no compound met any of these two criteria, i.e., bond angle ≤90 or <60.) These data compare favourably with those of Acree and Chickos [22], who reported a correlation coefficient of only 0.35 for 627 liquid crystals. The present results, however, required the removal of 56 compounds from the evaluation of the parameters, as their deviation from prediction was much larger than three times the cv-standard deviation.
Nevertheless, it was to be expected that the additional entropy terms relating to the semiliquid phases would blur the picture in comparison with the previous chapter, since not only each homologous series of liquid crystals but even individual molecules proceed via different melting pathways. This feature is even observable in the list of outliers where several entire homologous series had to be removed. As a consequence of this inhomogeneity, the scatter of the total phase-change entropy of the liquid crystals in Figure 11 is extraordinarily high, but, as the histogram in Figure 12 shows, is evenly distributed about the regression line. This, and the close similarities of R2 and Q2 as well as of the direct and the cross-validated standard deviations, collected at the bottom of Table 5, may lead to the assumption that the associated atom-group parameters are reliable enough for phase-change entropy predictions within the class of liquid crystals. Two homologous examples may prove whether this assumption is justified.
In Figure 13, the experimental total phase-change entropy data of the liquid-crystal homologues of 7-alkyl-2-(4-cyanophenyl)-fluorene (with alkyl = ethyl, propyl, butyl, pentyl, hexyl, heptyl, octyl and nonyl) are correlated with predicted values, revealing an excellent correlation coefficient R2 of 0.9176. The slope of the regression line, however, is at 0.8830 considerably lower than 1.0. Figure 14 shows the analogous correlation of the homologues of 3-(4-alkyloxyphenylamino)-1-(2-(5-cyanothienyl))-2-propen-1-one (with alkyl = pentyl, hexyl, heptyl, octyl, nonyl, decyl, undecyl, dodecyl, tridecyl and tetradecyl). Here, the correlation coefficient has been calculated to 0.0023 and the slope of the regression line is even slightly negative at −0.0364. These examples prove that the class of liquid crystals is too heterogeneous for the present atom-group additivity model to be applicable. Consequently, if even within the class of liquid crystals reliable predictions are impossible, attempts to do so outside this class would not make sense at all.

4. Conclusions

The application of a computer algorithm described in detail in an earlier paper [1], based on the atom-group additivity principle to calculate reliable values of the heat of combustion (and indirectly-formation), logPo/w, logS, refractivity, polarizability and toxicity, has successfully been extended to the prediction of the heats of vaporization, sublimation and solvation, and the entropy of fusion of ordinary molecules as well as the total phase-change entropy of liquid crystals. The principle to only accept experimental vaporization and sublimation data measured at or reduced to standard conditions also enabled the indirect calculation of the standard heat of fusion by applying Equation (2). It has been shown, however, that this indirect approach leads to rather rough estimates, yet still comparable to the often large differences of experimental values originating from different authors. The limits of the present method have been reached in the attempt to predict the total phase-change entropy of liquid crystals. In contrast to ordinary molecules which allow the entropy of fusion to be determined in a mutually comparable manner due to a mostly straightforward, uniform melting process, liquid crystals have proven to be an inconsistent class of compounds in that their melting processes pass through several individual semiliquid phases, preventing a standardized approach for the prediction of their phase-change entropy.
On the whole, the present computer algorithm, integrated in a project called ChemBrain IXL, has proven its versatility in that any extension to calculate the presented and future descriptors only requires a few more lines of controlling code to include the corresponding tables and descriptor names. At present, the project covers thermodynamic (heats of combustion, formation, solvation, vaporization, sublimation and fusion as well as entropy of fusion), solubility-related (logPo/w and logS), optics-related (refractivity), charge-related (polarizability) and environment-related (toxicity) descriptors. On the other hand, it also shows its limitations where the descriptor is either not addressable by the atom groups (e.g., with logBB) or does not describe a uniform characteristic (e.g., the total phase-change entropy). Yet, there is no limit to this ongoing project to extend the number of calculable descriptors beyond the present twelve, provided that there is a number of experimental data available that are large enough and reliable. ChemBrain IXL is available from Neuronix Software (www.neuronix.ch, Rudolf Naef, Lupsingen, Switzerland).

Supplementary Materials

The following files are available online.
The entire set of experimental and calculated data of the heat-of-vaporization calculations is available under the name of “S1. Experimental and Calculated Heat-of-Vaporization Data Table.doc”; the corresponding list of compounds is added as an SD file named “S2. Compounds List for Heat-of-Vaporization Calculations.sdf” and the outliers list as an Excel file under the name “S3. Compounds List of Heat-of-Vaporization Outliers.xls”.
The list of compounds, their experimental and calculated data and 3D structures of the heat-of-sublimation calculations are available under the names of “S4. Experimental and Calculated Heat-of-Sublimation Data Table.doc” and “S5. Compounds List for Heat-of-Sublimation Calculations.sdf”. A list of the outliers has been added under the name of “S6. Compounds List of Heat-of-Sublimation Outliers.xls”.
The supplementary material also offers the list of molecules for the enthalpy-of-fusion calculations together with the experimental data under the file names “S7. Experimental and Calculated Heat-of-Fusion Data Table.doc” and “S8. Compounds List for Heat-of-Fusion Calculations.sdf”. The list of the outliers is available under the name of “S9. Compounds List of Heat-of-Fusion Outliers.xls”.
The heat-of-solvation result list, encompassing the molecule names, experimental and calculated data, are available under the name “S10. Experimental and Calculated Heat-of-Solvation Data Table.doc”; and the molecules list, encompassing their name and 3D coordinates is collected under the name “S11. Compounds List for Heat-of-Solvation Calculations.sdf”.
The list of compounds for entropy-of-fusion calculations, together with experimental and calculated data is provided under the name of “S12. Experimental and Calculated Entropy-of-Fusion Data Table.doc”. The related compounds’ 3D-structures are available in “S13. Compounds List for Entropy-of-Fusion Calculations.sdf”, the list of outliers in the Excel sheet called “S14. Compounds List of Entropy-of-Fusion Outliers.xls”.
The list of the experimental and calculated data for the total phase-change entropy calculations is provided under “S15. Experimental and Calculated Tpc-Entropy Data Table.doc”, the related compounds under the name “S16. Compounds List for Tpc-Entropy Calculations.sdf”, and the outliers list under the name “S17. Compounds List of Tpc-Entropy Outliers.xls”.
All the figures are available under the names given in the text as gif files, and the tables as doc files.

Acknowledgments

R. Naef is indebted to the library of the University of Basel for allowing him full and free access to the electronic literature database.

Author contributions

R. Naef developed project ChemBrain and its entire software upon which this paper is based. R. Naef also fed the database, calculated and analysed the results and wrote the paper. W. E. Acree contributed all the experimental data and the majority of the literature references. Beyond this, R. Naef is deeply indebted to W. E. Acree for the many valuable discussions.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Naef, R. A Generally Applicable Computer Algorithm Based on the Group Additivity Method for the Calculation of Seven Molecular Descriptors: Heat of Combustion, LogPO/W, LogS, Refractivity, Polarizability, Toxicity and LogBB of Organic Compounds; Scope and Limits of Applicability. Molecules 2015, 20, 18279–18351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Ghose, A.K.; Crippen, G.M. Atomic physicochemical parameters for three-dimensional structure-directed quantitative structure-activity relationships I. Partition coefficients as a measure of hydrophobicity. J. Comput. Chem. 1986, 7, 565–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Ghose, A.K.; Pritchett, A.; Crippen, G.M. Atomic physicochemical parameters for three dimensional structure directed quantitative structure-activity relationships III: Modeling hydrophobic interactions. J. Comput. Chem. 1988, 9, 80–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Ghose, A.K.; Crippen, G.M. Atomic Physicochemical parameters for three-dimensional-structure-directed quantitative structure-activity relationships. 2. Modeling dispersive and hydrophobic interactions. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1987, 27, 21–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Miller, K.J.; Savchik, J.A. A new empirical Method to calculate Average Molecular Polarizabilities. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1979, 101, 7206–7213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Miller, K.J. Additivity methods in molecular polarizability. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1990, 112, 8533–8542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Sun, H. A universal molecular descriptor system for prediction of LogP, LogS, LogBB, and absorption. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 748–757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Acree, W.E., Jr.; Chickos, J.S. Phase Transition Enthalpy Measurements of Organic and Organometallic Compounds. Sublimation, Vaporization and Fusion Enthalpies from 1880 to 2010. J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 2010, 39, 043101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Roux, M.V.; Temprado, M.; Chickos, J.; Nagano, Y. Critically Evaluated Thermo-chemical Properties of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons. J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 2008, 37, 1855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Chickos, J.; Wang, T.; Sharma, E. Hypothetical Thermodynamic Properties: Vapor Pressures and Vaporization Enthalpies of the Even n-Alkanes from C40 to C76 at T = 298.15 K by Correlation-Gas Chromatography. Are the Vaporization Enthalpies a Linear Function of Carbon Number? J. Chem. Eng. Data 2008, 53, 481–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Chickos, J.; Lipkind, D. Hypothetical Thermodynamic Properties: Vapor Pressures and Vaporization Enthalpies of the Even n-Alkanes from C78 to C92 at T = 298.15 K by Correlation-Gas Chromatography. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2008, 53, 2432–2440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Chickos, J.; Hanshaw, W. Vapor Pressures and Vaporization Enthalpies of the n-Alkanes from C21 to C30 at T = 298.15 K by Correlation Gas Chromatography. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2004, 49, 77–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Chickos, J.; Hanshaw, W. Vapor Pressures and Vaporization Enthalpies of the n-Alkanes from C31 to C38 at T = 298.15 K by Correlation Gas Chromatography. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2004, 49, 620–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Wilson, J.; Gobble, C.; Chickos, J. Vaporization, Sublimation, and Fusion Enthalpies of Some Saturated and Unsaturated Long Chain Fatty Acids by Correlation Gas Chromatography. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2015, 60, 202–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Abraham, M.H. Scales of Hydrogen-bonding: Their Construction and Application to Physicochemical and Biochemical Processes. Chem. Rev. 1993, 22, 73–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Abraham, M.H.; Chadha, H.S.; Whinting, G.S.; Mitchell, R.C. Hydrogen-bonding. 32. An Analysis of Water-Octanol and Water-Alkane Partitioning and the ΔlogP Parameter of Seiler. J. Pharm. Sci. 1994, 83, 1085–1100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Abraham, M.H.; Zissimos, A.M.; Acree, W.E. Partition of solutes from the gas phase and from water to wet and dry di-n-butyl Ether: A linear free energy relationship analysis. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2001, 3, 3732–3736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Abraham, M.H.; Le, J. The Correlation and Prediction of the Solubility of Compounds in Water using an amended Solvation Energy Relationship. J. Pharm. Sci. 1999, 88, 868–880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Jover, J.; Bosque, R.; Sales, J. Determination of Abraham Solute Parameters from Molecular Structure. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 1098–1106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Cabani, S.; Gianni, P.; Mollica, V.; Lepori, L. Group contributions to the thermodynamic properties of non-ionic organic solutes in dilute aqueous solution. J. Sol. Chem. 1981, 10, 563–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Chickos, J.S.; Acree, W.E. Jr.; Liebman, J.F. Estimating Solid-Liquid Phase Change Enthalpies and Entropies. J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 1999, 28, 1535–1673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Acree, W.E., Jr.; Chickos, J.S. Phase Change Enthalpies and Entropies of Liquid Crystals. J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 2006, 35, 1051–1330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Almeida, A.R.R.; Monte, M.J.S. Vapour pressures and phase transition properties of four substituted acetophenones. J. Chem. Thermodyn. 2016, 107, 42–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Gobble, C.; Vikman, J.; Chickos, J.S. Evaluation of the Vaporization Enthalpies and Liquid Vapor Pressures of (R)-Deprenyl, (S)-Benzphetamine, Alverine, and a Series of Aliphatic Tertiary Amines by Correlation Gas Chromatography at T/K = 298.15. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2014, 59, 2551–2562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Miroshnichenko, E.A.; Kon’kova, T.S.; Pashchenko, L.L.; Matyushin, Y.N.; Inozemtsev, Y.O.; Tartakovskii, V.A. Energy characteristics of nitrooxazolidines and their radicals. Russ. Chem. Bull. Int. Ed. 2016, 65, 1876–1878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Emel’yanenko, V.N.; Zaitseva, K.V.; Nagrimanov, R.N.; Solomonov, B.N.; Verevkin, S.P. Benchmark Thermondynamic Properties of Methyl- and Methoxy-Benzamides: Comprehensive Experimental and Theoretical Study. J. Phys. Chem. A 2016, 120, 8419–8429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Gobble, C.; Gutterman, A.; Chickos, J.S. Some thermodynamic properties of benzocaine. Struct. Chem. 2013, 24, 1903–1907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Keating, L.; Harris, H.H.; Chickos, J.S. Vapor pressures and vaporization enthalpy of (−) α-bisabolol and (dl) menthol by correlation gas chromatography. J. Chem. Thermodyn. 2017, 107, 18–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Sanchez-Buläs, T.; Cruz-Väsquez, O.; Hernändez-Obregon, J.; Rojas, A. Enthalpies of fusion, vaporisation and sublimation of crown ethers determined by thermogravimetry and differential scanning calorimetry. Thermochim. Acta 2017, 650, 123–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Panneerselvam, K.; Anthony, M.P.; Srinivasan, T.G.; Rao, P.R.V. Enthalpies of vaporization of N,N-dialkyl monamides at 298.15K. Thermochim. Acta 2009, 495, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Gobble, C.; Walker, B.; Chickos, J.S. The Vaporization Enthalpy and Vapor Pressure of Fenpropidin and Phencyclidine (PCP) at T/K = 298.15 by Correlation Gas Chromatography. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2016, 61, 896–902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kozlovskiy, M.; Gobble, C.; Chickos, J.S. Vapor pressures and vaporization enthalpies of a series of esters used in flavors by correlation gas chromatography. J. Chem. Thermodyn. 2015, 86, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Costa, J.C.S.; Lima, C.F.R.A.C.; Mendes, A.; Santos, L.M.N.B.F. Fluorination effect on the thermodynamic properties of long-chain hydrocarbons and alcohols. J. Chem. Thermodyn. 2016, 102, 378–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Simmons, D.; Chickos, J. Enthalpy of vaporization and vapor pressure of whiskey lactone and menthalactone by correlation gas chromatography. J. Chem. Thermodyn. 2017, 110, 65–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Oliveira, J.A.S.A.; Oliveira, T.S.M.; Gaspar, A.; Borges, F.; Ribeiro da Silva, M.D.M.C.; Monte, M.J.S. Study on the volatility of halogenated fluorenes. Chemosphere 2016, 157, 25–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Maxwell, R.; Chickos, J. An Examination of the Thermodynamics of Fusion, Vaporization, and Sublimation of Ibuprofen and Naproxen by Correlation Gas Chromatography. J. Pharm. Sci. 2012, 101, 805–814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Mori, M.; Rath, N.; Gobble, C.; Chickos, J. Vaporization, Sublimation Enthalpy, and Crystal Structures of Imidazo[1,2-a]pyrazine and Phthalazine. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2016, 61, 370–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Goodrich, S.; Hasanovic, J.; Gobble, C.; Chickos, J.S. Vaporization Enthalpies and Vapor Pressures of Some Insect Pheromones by Correlation Gas Chromatography. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2016, 61, 1524–1530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Freitas, V.L.S.; Silva, C.A.O.; Paiva, M.A.T.; Ribeiro da Silva, M.D.M.C. Energetic effects of alkyl groups (methyl and ethyl) on the nitrogen of the morpholine structure. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2017, 121, 1059–1071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Althoff, M.A.; Grieger, K.; Härtel, M.A.C.; Karaghiosoff, K.L.; Klapötke, T.M.; Metzulat, M. Application of the Transpiration Method to Determine the Vapor Pressure and Related Physico-Chemical Data of Low Volatile, Thermolabile, and Toxic Organo(thio)phosphates. J. Phys. Chem. A 2017, 121, 2603–2609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Gobble, C.; Chickos, J.; Verevkin, S.P. Vapor Pressures and Vaporization Enthalpies of a Series of Dialkyl Phthalates by Correlation Gas Chromatography. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2014, 59, 1353–1365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Brunetti, B.; Lapi, A.; Ciprioti, S.V. Thermodynamic study on six tricyclic nitrogen heterocyclic compounds by thermal analysis and effusion techniques. Thermochim. Acta 2016, 636, 71–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Emel’yanenko, V.N.; Kaliner, M.; Strassner, T.; Verevkin, S.P. Thermochemical properties of different 1-(R-phenyl)-1H-imidazoles. Fluid Phase Equilib. 2017, 433, 40–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Antón, V.; Artigas, H.; Muñoz-Embid, J.; Artal, M.; Lafuente, C. Thermophysical study of 2-acetylthiophene: Experimental and modelled results. Fluid Phase Equilib. 2017, 433, 126–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Portnova, S.V.; Krasnykh, E.L.; Levanova, S.V. Temperature Dependences of Saturated Vapor Pressure and the Enthalpy of Vaporization of n-Pentyl Esters of Dicarboxylic Acids. Russ. J. Phys. Chem. A 2016, 90, 990–993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Lepori, L.; Matteoli, E.; Gianni, P. Vapor Pressure and Its Temperature Dependence of 28 Organic Compounds: Cyclic Amines, Cyclic Ethers, and Cyclic and Open Chain Secondary Alcohols. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2017, 62, 194–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Lima, C.F.R.A.C.; Rodrigues, A.S.M.C.; Santos, L.M.N.B.F. Effect of Confined Hindrance in Polyphenylbenzenes. J. Phys. Chem. A 2017, 121, 2475–2481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Abboud, J.-L.M.; Alkorta, I.; Davalos, J.Z.; Koppel, I.A.; Koppel, I.; Lenoir, D.; Martínez, S.; Mishima, M. The Thermodynamic Stability of Adamantylideneadamantane and Its Proton- and Electron-Exchanges. Comparison with Simple Alkenes. Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 2016, 89, 762–769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Silva, A.L.R.; Ribeira da Silva, M.D.M.C. Comprehensive Thermochemical Study of Cyclic Five- and Six-Membered N,N′-Thioureas. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Carvalho, T.M.T.; Amaral, L.M.P.F.; Morais, V.M.F.; Ribeiro da Silva, M.D.M.C. Energetic Effect of the Carboxylic Acid Functional Group in Indole Derivatives. J. Phys. Chem. A 2017, 121, 2980–2989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Freitas, V.L.S.; Lima, A.C.M.O.; Sapei, E.; Ribeiro da Silva, M.D.M.C. Comprehensive thermophysical and thermochemical studies of vanillyl alcohol. J. Chem. Thermodyn. 2016, 102, 287–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Lopes, C.S.D.; Agapito, F.; Bernardes, C.E.S.; Minas da Piedade, M.E. Thermochemistry of 4-HOC6H4COR (R = H, CH3, C2H5, n-C3H7, n-C4H9, n-C5H11, and n-C6H13) compounds. J. Chem. Thermodyn. 2017, 104, 281–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Emel’yanenko, V.N.; Nagrimanov, R.N.; Solomonov, B.N.; Verevkin, S.P. Adamantanes: Benchmarking of thermochemical properties. J. Chem. Thermodyn. 2016, 101, 130–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Nagrimanov, R.N.; Solomonov, B.N.; Emel’yanenko, V.N.; Verevkin, S.P. Six-membered ring aliphatic compounds: A search for regularities in phase transitions. Thermochim. Acta 2016, 638, 80–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Blokhina, S.; Sharapova, A.; Ol’khovich, M.; Perlovich, G. Sublimation thermodynamics of four fluoroquinolone antimicrobial compounds. J. Chem. Thermodyn. 2017, 105, 37–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Flores, H.; Ledo, J.M.; Hernandez-Pérez, J.M.; Camarillo, E.A.; Sandoval-Lira, J.; Amador, M.P. Thermochemical and theoretical study of 2-oxazolidinone and 3-acetyl-2-oxazolidinone. J. Chem. Thermodyn. 2016, 102, 386–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Emel’yanenko, V.N.; Nagrimanov, R.N.; Verevkin, S.P. Benchmarking thermochemical experiments and calculations of nitrogen-containing substituted adamantanes. J. Thermal. Anal. Calorim. 2017, 128, 1535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Oliveira, J.A.S.A.; Freitas, V.L.S.; Notario, R.; da Silva, M.D.M.C.R.; Monte, M.J.S. Thermodynamic properties of 2,7-di-tert-butylfluorene—An experimental and computational study. J. Chem. Thermodyn. 2016, 101, 115–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Carvalho, T.M.T.; Amaral, L.M.P.F.; Morais, V.M.F.; Ribeiro da Silva, M.D.M.C. Calorimetric and computational studies for three nitroimidazole isomers. J. Chem. Thermodyn. 2016, 105, 267–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Chickos, J.S.; Acree, W.E., Jr. Total phase change entropies and enthalpies. An update on fusion enthalpies and their estimation. Thermochim. Acta 2009, 495, 5–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Wang, L.; Xing, C.; Zhao, L.; Xu, L.; Liu, G. Measurement and correlation of solubility of 2-chloro-3-(trifluoromethyl)pyridine in pure solvents and ethanol + n-propanol mixtures. J. Mol. Liq. 2017, 238, 470–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Guenthner, A.J.; Ramirez, S.M.; Ford, M.D.; Soto, D.; Boatz, J.A.; Ghiassi, K.B.; Mabry, J.M. Organic Crystal Engineering of Thermosetting Cyanate Ester Monomers: Influence of Structure on Melting Point. Cryst. Growth Des. 2016, 16, 4082–4093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Trache, D.; Khimeche, K.; Dahmani, A. Study of (Solid–Liquid) Phase Equilibria for Mixtures of Energetic Material Stabilizers and Prediction for Their Subsequent Performance. Int. J. Thermophys. 2013, 34, 226–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Eckert, K.-A.; Dasgupta, S.; Selge, B.; Ay, P. Solid liquid phase diagrams of binary fatty acid mixtures—Palmitic/stearic with oleic/linoleic/linolenic acid mixture. Thermochim. Acta 2016, 630, 50–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Blokhina, S.; Sharapova, A.; Ol’khovich, M.; Volkova, T.; Perlovich, G. Studying the sublimation thermodynamics of ethionamide and pyridinecarbothioamide isomers by transpiration method. Thermochim. Acta 2015, 622, 97–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Forte, A.; Melo, C.I.; Bogel-Lukasik, R.; Bogel-Lukasik, E. A favourable solubility of isoniazid, an antitubercular antibiotic drug, in alternative solvents. Fluid Phase Equil. 2012, 318, 89–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Carletta, A.; Meinguet, C.; Wouters, J.; Tilborg, A. Solid-State Investigation of Polymorphism and Tautomerism of Phenylthiazole-thione: A Combined Crystallographic, Calorimetric, and Theoretical Survey. Cryst. Growth Des. 2015, 15, 2461–2473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Leitner, J.; Jurik, S. DSC study and thermodynamic modelling of the system paracetamol–o-acetylsalicylic acid. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Mintz, C.; Clark, M.; Acree, W.E., Jr.; Abraham, M.H. Enthalpy of Solvation Correlations for Gaseous Solutes Dissolved in Water and in 1-Octanol Based on the Abraham Model. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47, 115–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Catalan, J.; Couto, A.; Gomez, J.; Saiz, J.L.; Laynez, J. Towards a solvent acidity scale: The calorimetry of the N-methyl imidazole probe. J. Chem. Soc. Perkin Trans. 2 1992, 7, 1181–1185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Spencer, J.N.; Hovick, J.W. Solvation of urea and methyl-substituted ureas by water and DMF. Can. J. Chem. 1988, 66, 562–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Gatta, G.D.; Badea, E. Thermodynamics of Solvation of Urea and Some Monosubstituted N-Alkylureas in Water at 298.15 K. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2007, 52, 419–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Rouw, A.; Somsen, G. Solvation and Hydrophobic Hydration of Alkyl-substituted Ureas and Amides in N,N-Dimethylformamide + Water Mixtures. J. Chem. Soc. Faraday Trans. 1 1982, 78, 3397–3408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Badea, E.; della Gatta, G.; Jozwiak, M.; Giancola, C. Hydration of Thiourea and Mono-, Di-, and Tetra-N-Alkylthioureas at Infinite Dilution: A Thermodynamic Study at a Temperature of 298.15 K. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2011, 56, 4778–4785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Stimson, E.R.; Schrier, E.E. Calorimetric Investigation of Salt-Amide Interactions in Aqueous Solution. J. Chem. Eng. Data 1974, 19, 354–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Batov, D.V.; Zaichikov, A.M. Group Contributions to the Enthalpy Characteristics of Solutions of Formic and Acetic Acid Amides in Water-1,2-Propanediol Mixtures. Russ. J. Gen. Chem. 2003, 73, 511–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Starzewski, P.; Wadsö, I.; Zielenkiewicz, W. Enthalpies of vaporization of some N-alkylamides at 298.15 K. J. Chem. Thermodyn. 1984, 16, 331–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Morgan, K.M.; Kopp, D.A. Solvent effects on the stability of simple secondary amides. J. Chem. Soc. Perkin Trans. 2 1998, 2759–2763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Teplitsky, A.B.; Glukhova, O.T.; Sukhodub, L.F.; Yanson, I.K.; Zielenkiewicz, A.; Zielenkiewicz, W.; Kosinski, J.; Wierzchowski, K.L. Thermochemistry of aqueous Solutions of alkylated Nucleic Acid Bases. IV. Enthalpies of 5-Alkyluracils. Biophys. Chem. 1982, 15, 139–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Zielenkiewicz, W.; Szterner, P.; Kaminski, M. Vapor Pressures, Molar Enthalpies of Sublimation, and Molar Enthalpies of Solution in Water of Selected Amino Derivatives of Uracil and 5-Nitrouracil. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2003, 48, 1132–1136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Zielenkiewicz, W.; Szterner, P. Vapor Pressures, Molar Enthalpies of Sublimation, and Molar Enthalpies of Solution in Water of 5-(Trifluoromethyl)uracil. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2004, 49, 1197–1200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Zielenkiewicz, W.; Szterner, P. Thermodynamic Investigation of Uracil and Its Halo Derivatives. Enthalpies of Solution and Solvation in Methanol. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2005, 50, 1139–1143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Zhou, Y.; Wang, J.; Fang, B.; Guo, N.; Xiao, Y.; Hao, H.; Bao, Y.; Huang, X. Solubility and dissolution thermodynamic properties of 2-Cyano-4′-methylbiphenyl in binary solvent mixtures. J. Mol. Liq. 2017, 236, 298–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Zhang, Q.-A.; Du, C.-J. Solubility of cyclohexyl-phosphoramidic acid diphenyl ester in selected solvents. J. Mol. Liq. 2015, 211, 527–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Zhao, F.-Q.; Pei, C.; Hu, R.-Z.; Yang, L.; Zhang, Z.-Z.; Zhou, Y.-S.; Yang, X.-W.; Yin, G.; Gao, S.L.; Shi, Q.-Z. Thermochemical properties and non-isothermal decomposition reaction kinetics of 3,4-dinitrofurazanfuroxan (DNTF). J. Hazard. Mat. 2004, A113, 67–71. [Google Scholar]
Sample Availability: Not available.
Figure 1. Correlation Diagram of the Enthalpy-of-Vaporization Data (N = 3460; R2 = 0.9677; Q2 = 0.9640; regression line: intercept = 1.9756, slope = 0.9681).
Figure 1. Correlation Diagram of the Enthalpy-of-Vaporization Data (N = 3460; R2 = 0.9677; Q2 = 0.9640; regression line: intercept = 1.9756, slope = 0.9681).
Molecules 22 01059 g001
Figure 2. Histogram of the Enthalpy-of-Vaporization Data (S = 4.56 kJ/mol; Exp. values range: 15.6–177.2 kJ/mol).
Figure 2. Histogram of the Enthalpy-of-Vaporization Data (S = 4.56 kJ/mol; Exp. values range: 15.6–177.2 kJ/mol).
Molecules 22 01059 g002
Figure 3. Correlation Diagram of the Enthalpy-of-Sublimation Data (N = 1866; R2 = 0.8887; Q2 = 0.8657; regression line: intercept = 12.0233, slope = 0.8884).
Figure 3. Correlation Diagram of the Enthalpy-of-Sublimation Data (N = 1866; R2 = 0.8887; Q2 = 0.8657; regression line: intercept = 12.0233, slope = 0.8884).
Molecules 22 01059 g003
Figure 4. Histogram of the Enthalpy-of-Sublimation Data (S = 11.39 kJ/mol; Exp. values range: 38.7–331.88 kJ/mol).
Figure 4. Histogram of the Enthalpy-of-Sublimation Data (S = 11.39 kJ/mol; Exp. values range: 38.7–331.88 kJ/mol).
Molecules 22 01059 g004
Figure 5. Correlation Diagram of the Enthalpy-of-Fusion Data (N = 990; R2 = 0.6066; calculated values evaluated by means of Equation (2)).
Figure 5. Correlation Diagram of the Enthalpy-of-Fusion Data (N = 990; R2 = 0.6066; calculated values evaluated by means of Equation (2)).
Molecules 22 01059 g005
Figure 6. Histogram of the Enthalpy-of-Fusion Data (S = 9.78 kJ/mol; Exp. values range: 0.30–164 kJ/mol).
Figure 6. Histogram of the Enthalpy-of-Fusion Data (S = 9.78 kJ/mol; Exp. values range: 0.30–164 kJ/mol).
Molecules 22 01059 g006
Figure 7. Correlation Diagram of the Enthalpy-of-Solvation Data (N = 388; R2 = 0.9731; Q2 = 0.9546; regression line: intercept = −1.4422, slope = 0.9759).
Figure 7. Correlation Diagram of the Enthalpy-of-Solvation Data (N = 388; R2 = 0.9731; Q2 = 0.9546; regression line: intercept = −1.4422, slope = 0.9759).
Molecules 22 01059 g007
Figure 8. Histogram of the Enthalpy-of-Solvation Data (S = 4.34 kJ/mol; exp. values range: −149.51–−13.7 kJ/mol).
Figure 8. Histogram of the Enthalpy-of-Solvation Data (S = 4.34 kJ/mol; exp. values range: −149.51–−13.7 kJ/mol).
Molecules 22 01059 g008
Figure 9. Correlation Diagram of the Entropy-of-Fusion Data (N = 2701; R2 = 0.8874; Q2 = 0.8727; regression line: intercept = 8.6540; slope = 0.8883).
Figure 9. Correlation Diagram of the Entropy-of-Fusion Data (N = 2701; R2 = 0.8874; Q2 = 0.8727; regression line: intercept = 8.6540; slope = 0.8883).
Molecules 22 01059 g009
Figure 10. Histogram of the Entropy-of-Fusion Data (S = 17.93 J/mol/K; Exp. values range: 0.65–513.5 J/mol/K).
Figure 10. Histogram of the Entropy-of-Fusion Data (S = 17.93 J/mol/K; Exp. values range: 0.65–513.5 J/mol/K).
Molecules 22 01059 g010
Figure 11. Correlation Diagram of the Total Phase-change Entropy Data (N = 2663; R2 = 0.6091; Q2 = 0.5804; regression line: intercept = 43.5325, slope = 0.6083).
Figure 11. Correlation Diagram of the Total Phase-change Entropy Data (N = 2663; R2 = 0.6091; Q2 = 0.5804; regression line: intercept = 43.5325, slope = 0.6083).
Molecules 22 01059 g011
Figure 12. Histogram of the Total Phase-change Entropy Data (S = 32.79 J/mol/K; Exp. values range: 17.6–480.76 J/mol/K).
Figure 12. Histogram of the Total Phase-change Entropy Data (S = 32.79 J/mol/K; Exp. values range: 17.6–480.76 J/mol/K).
Molecules 22 01059 g012
Figure 13. Correlation Diagram of the Total Phase-change Entropy Data of the homologues of 7-alkyl-2-(4-cyanophenyl)-fluorenes. (N = 8; R2 = 0.9176; σ = 2.90 J/mol/K).
Figure 13. Correlation Diagram of the Total Phase-change Entropy Data of the homologues of 7-alkyl-2-(4-cyanophenyl)-fluorenes. (N = 8; R2 = 0.9176; σ = 2.90 J/mol/K).
Molecules 22 01059 g013
Figure 14. Correlation Diagram of the Total Phase-change Entropy Data of the homologues of 3-(4-alkyloxyphenylamino)-1-(2-(5-cyanothienyl))-2-propen-1-one. (N = 10; R2 = 0.0023; σ = 12.29 J/mol/K).
Figure 14. Correlation Diagram of the Total Phase-change Entropy Data of the homologues of 3-(4-alkyloxyphenylamino)-1-(2-(5-cyanothienyl))-2-propen-1-one. (N = 10; R2 = 0.0023; σ = 12.29 J/mol/K).
Molecules 22 01059 g014
Table 1. Atom Groups and their Contributions (in kJ/mol) for Heat-of-Vaporization Calculations.
Table 1. Atom Groups and their Contributions (in kJ/mol) for Heat-of-Vaporization Calculations.
EntryAtom TypeNeighboursContributionOccurrencesMolecules
1Const 8.6135813581
2BC321.5522
3BN2Cl33.1911
4BNCl228.5911
5BO2Cl28.2322
6BOCl225.5311
7BS376.7444
8C sp3H3C3.0753802388
9C sp3H3N15.65242133
10C sp3H3N(+)31.3322
11C sp3H3O16.71372263
12C sp3H3S14.443125
13C sp3H3P9.0464
14C sp3H3Si5.8713653
15C sp3H2BC−3.0762
16C sp3H2C24.6710,5882030
17C sp3H2CN15.00430243
18C sp3H2CN(+)29.15109
19C sp3H2CO15.791147779
20C sp3H2CS15.50159101
21C sp3H2CP6.6762
22C sp3H2CF6.201111
23C sp3H2CCl14.137665
24C sp3H2CBr16.692421
25C sp3H2CJ20.902926
26C sp3H2CSi2.0113454
27C sp3H2N228.2753
28C sp3H2NO20.4644
29C sp3H2O227.431916
30C sp3H2OS22.4011
31C sp3H2OF18.9011
32C sp3H2OCl23.0622
33C sp3H2OSi10.3011
34C sp3H2S224.0822
35C sp3H2SSi6.6699
36C sp3H2Si22.8721
37C sp3HC33.54939615
38C sp3HC2N12.697564
39C sp3HC2N(+)28.3933
40C sp3HC2O14.99243203
41C sp3HC2S13.612622
42C sp3HC2Si7.2064
43C sp3HC2F5.9676
44C sp3HC2Cl9.664038
45C sp3HC2Br12.122116
46C sp3HC2J18.7944
47C sp3HCN2(+)47.1033
48C sp3HCO225.392522
49C sp3HCOCl20.9311
50C sp3HCF27.101514
51C sp3HCFCl12.611515
52C sp3HCCl216.962322
53C sp3HCClBr18.2311
54C sp3HNO232.3111
55C sp3HO337.3344
56C sp3HOF217.0677
57C sp3HOFCl20.4911
58C sp3HSiCl223.8911
59C sp3C41.92335274
60C sp3C3N12.602823
61C sp3C3N(+)26.1544
62C sp3C3O12.21135116
63C sp3C3S13.691816
64C sp3C3F2.943119
65C sp3C3Cl7.7786
66C sp3C3Br11.9533
67C sp3C3J19.6322
68C sp3C2NO20.3411
69C sp3C2NF8.8811
70C sp3C2O223.163527
71C sp3C2OF18.3833
72C sp3C2F24.7532870
73C sp3C2FCl8.7355
74C sp3C2Cl213.3555
75C sp3CN3(+)46.8933
76C sp3CNF215.25156
77C sp3CNF2(+)30.7732
78C sp3CN2F(+)28.2543
79C sp3CO328.4866
80C sp3COF213.653630
81C sp3COCl220.6144
82C sp3CSF212.7021
83C sp3CF32.9614790
84C sp3CF2Cl6.64109
85C sp3CF2Br9.0254
86C sp3CFCl213.4177
87C sp3CFClBr17.3711
88C sp3CCl317.432221
89C sp3NF314.4854
90C sp3NF3(+)−1.7621
91C sp3N3F(+)32.3611
92C sp3O438.1522
93C sp3O2F224.80142
94C sp3OF39.7197
95C sp3OF2Cl17.8422
96C sp3OCl327.4022
97C sp3PF32.7321
98C sp2H2=C2.17182170
99C sp2HC=C5.031314694
100C sp2HC=N8.811515
101C sp2HC=O11.44122122
102C sp2H=CN17.1810357
103C sp2H=CO10.253532
104C sp2H=CS8.204935
105C sp2H=CSi10.7744
106C sp2H=CF−0.0911
107C sp2H=CCl10.3886
108C sp2H=CBr13.7311
109C sp2HN=N30.133939
110C sp2HN=O34.4666
111C sp2H=NO14.0711
112C sp2H=NS18.0722
113C sp2HO=O18.861412
114C sp2C2=C5.27220190
115C sp2C2=N8.221514
116C sp2C2=O13.59149140
117C sp2C=CN15.361410
118C sp2C=CO12.543931
119C sp2C2=S71.2922
120C sp2C=CS9.452924
121C sp2C=CF2.72115
122C sp2C=CCl5.8385
123C sp2C=CBr15.7911
124C sp2=CN29.1232
125C sp2CN=N28.801616
126C sp2CN=N(+)11.3222
127C sp2CN=O35.354747
128C sp2C=NO22.7955
129C sp2CN=S18.2732
130C sp2C=NS17.4911
131C sp2C=NCl11.9311
132C sp2=CNCl22.6721
133C sp2CO=O17.20684594
134C sp2=COS17.4811
135C sp2C=OS12.3399
136C sp2=COF15.5311
137C sp2C=OCl15.41119
138C sp2C=OBr22.2833
139C sp2C=OJ25.8222
140C sp2=CF2−0.2633
141C sp2=CFCl9.8132
142C sp2=CCl217.5265
143C sp2N2=N29.2522
144C sp2N2=O35.0533
145C sp2N=NS13.5055
146C sp2NO=O33.4833
147C sp2=NOCl24.2711
148C sp2NS=S44.3922
149C sp2O2=O31.571313
150C sp2O=OCl22.7322
151C sp2S2=S34.0311
152C aromaticH:C24.644749928
153C aromaticH:C:N11.7411870
154C aromaticH:C:N(+)22.0421
155C aromaticH:N215.3675
156C aromatic:C36.6723369
157C aromaticC:C25.291053618
158C aromaticC:C:N9.943830
159C aromatic:C2N14.44140115
160C aromatic:C2N(+)24.383331
161C aromatic:C2:N10.602114
162C aromatic:C2O8.04443253
163C aromatic:C2S9.473025
164C aromatic:C2Si4.67108
165C aromatic:C2F4.4514372
166C aromatic:C2Cl9.43429146
167C aromatic:C2Br12.4914969
168C aromatic:C2J19.482926
169C aromatic:CN:N16.7222
170C aromatic:C:NO13.6743
171C aromatic:C:NF14.3411
172C aromatic:C:NCl15.7433
173C aromatic:C:NBr25.2411
174C aromaticN:N220.1952
175C aromatic:N2O16.4422
176C spH#C2.421514
177C spC#C6.056233
178C sp=C25.5044
179C spC#N17.387270
180C sp#CCl9.3132
181C sp=N=O10.4465
182C sp=N=S23.0833
183N sp3H2C2.307858
184N sp3H2C(pi)8.056159
185N sp3H2N19.2387
186N sp3H2S28.1822
187N sp3HC2−11.345956
188N sp3HC2(pi)−1.942726
189N sp3HC2(2pi)−2.432121
190N sp3HCN−0.7632
191N sp3HCN(pi)−13.3333
192N sp3HCN(2pi)4.9711
193N sp3HCS(pi)5.3477
194N sp3HCSi−4.0266
195N sp3HSi21.9411
196N sp3BC2−31.3032
197N sp3C3−30.50111101
198N sp3C3(pi)−25.563731
199N sp3C3(2pi)−22.955250
200N sp3C3(3pi)−27.031313
201N sp3C2N−19.6443
202N sp3C2N(+)0.0011
203N sp3C2N(pi)−27.1632
204N sp3C2N(+)(pi)3.2444
205N sp3C2N(2pi)−24.2844
206N sp3C2N(3pi)−26.8422
207N sp3C2O8.2411
208N sp3C2P−17.9852
209N sp3C2Si−19.79128
210N sp3CN2(2pi)−36.4311
211N sp3CN2(+)(2pi)16.4411
212N sp3CF2−4.5622
213N sp3CF2(pi)−12.6111
214N sp3CSi2−17.8111
215N sp3Si3−1.7911
216N sp2H=C1.2922
217N sp2C=C−10.468582
218N sp2C=N−5.891910
219N sp2C=N(+)−2.791513
220N sp2=CN18.8199
221N sp2=CO10.271714
222N sp2=CF0.0011
223N sp2N=N15.9153
224N sp2O=O0.5977
225N aromatic:C2−5.1010478
226N aromatic:C:N5.3584
227N(+) sp3C2NO(-)0.0011
228N(+) sp2CO=O(-)−2.097856
229N(+) sp2C=NO(-)−19.8933
230N(+) sp2NO=O(-)0.3565
231N(+) sp2O2=O(-)9.021711
232N(+) aromatic:C2O(-)0.0011
233N(+) spC#C(-)−8.4822
234N(+) sp=N2(-)5.961210
235OHC14.55322288
236OHC(pi)20.98174157
237OHN0.0011
238OHN(pi)19.0322
239OHO23.7555
240OHSi26.4111
241OBC−17.9153
242OC2−17.86424270
243OC2(pi)−13.29744629
244OC2(2pi)−7.15145120
245OCN(pi)0.0077
246OCN(+)(pi)2.171711
247OCN(2pi)−2.8299
248OCO−8.765420
249OCS2.45189
250OCP−2.7110442
251OCP(pi)1.2575
252OCSi−11.397929
253OCSi(pi)−14.853713
254ON2(2pi)−0.7233
255OOSi4.2394
256OP216.6811
257OSi2−6.52154
258P3C3−6.8333
259P3C2O2.7111
260P3N3−7.0911
261P3N2Cl10.6411
262P3O3−4.0711
263P4HO2=O9.2322
264P4CO2=O5.4033
265P4O3=O−3.861615
266P4O3=S1.1099
267P4O2=OS1.7744
268P4O2S=S1.7388
269S2HC1.493329
270S2HC(pi)6.2311
271S2HP23.5033
272S2BC−24.53124
273S2C2−10.516765
274S2C2(pi)−2.712322
275S2C2(2pi)0.534444
276S2CS−0.35168
277S2CS(pi)2.3921
278S2CP−1.9999
279S2Si2−3.4011
280S4C2=O22.6044
281S4C2=O227.8099
282S4C2F2−5.9211
283S4CN=O21.9499
284S4C=O2S37.5421
285S4O2=O−3.8355
286S4O2=O24.7944
287SiH3C0.0011
288SiH2CN2.2011
289SiHC3−4.212424
290SiHC2O2.3621
291SiHC2S0.0021
292SiHCO28.3351
293SiHN38.0122
294SiC4−0.572120
295SiC3N−1.801814
296SiC3O0.3566
297SiC2O25.641811
298SiCO3−2.402626
299SiO4−16.1466
300HH Acceptor−12.451616
301AlkaneNo. of C atoms0.093072286
302Unsaturated HCNo. of C atoms−0.074100413
ABased onValid groups185 3581
BGoodness of fitR20.9678 3460
CDeviationAverage2.99 3460
DDeviationStandard4.30 3460
EK-fold cvK10 3386
FGoodness of fitQ20.9641 3386
GDeviationAverage (cv)3.14 3386
HDeviationStandard (cv)4.56 3386
Table 2. Atom Groups and their Contributions (in kJ/mol) for Heat-of-Sublimation Calculations.
Table 2. Atom Groups and their Contributions (in kJ/mol) for Heat-of-Sublimation Calculations.
EntryAtom TypeNeighboursContributionOccurrencesMolecules
1Const 21.0319601960
2BC365.8222
3C sp3H3C5.991322623
4C sp3H3N26.9614387
5C sp3H3N(+)98.9811
6C sp3H3O28.51181122
7C sp3H3S30.0676
8C sp3H2C26.882602508
9C sp3H2CN21.98224116
10C sp3H2CN(+)27.461311
11C sp3H2CO29.62242134
12C sp3H2CS23.295031
13C sp3H2CF15.9111
14C sp3H2CCl17.5933
15C sp3H2CBr22.7654
16C sp3H2CJ21.8332
17C sp3H2N243.95186
18C sp3H2NCl36.2911
19C sp3H2O253.352513
20C sp3H2OS54.7811
21C sp3H2S247.4564
22C sp3HBC2−36.1731
23C sp3HC32.28509190
24C sp3HC2N14.283430
25C sp3HC2N(+)21.0199
26C sp3HC2O24.278247
27C sp3HC2S17.591411
28C sp3HC2F5.1811
29C sp3HC2Cl11.4972
30C sp3HC2Br−0.9511
31C sp3HCN239.4882
32C sp3HCN2(+)39.9322
33C sp3HCNO34.7321
34C sp3HCNS20.5621
35C sp3HCO239.9633
36C sp3HCF2−0.1911
37C sp3HCCl215.7811
38C sp3HN3(+)37.3111
39C sp3HO372.2333
40C sp3C4−4.25209137
41C sp3C3N5.871813
42C sp3C3N(+)18.441411
43C sp3C3O15.184031
44C sp3C3S6.4055
45C sp3C3F1.8933
46C sp3C3Cl−8.0611
47C sp3C3Br2.3411
48C sp3C2N2(+)34.7876
49C sp3C2O239.7388
50C sp3C2S237.2841
51C sp3C2F27.07628
52C sp3CN3(+)43.891912
53C sp3CN2F(+)25.9811
54C sp3CO357.4222
55C sp3CF3−4.712723
56C sp3CCl316.1032
57C sp3N3F(+)44.0011
58C sp3O473.4311
59C sp2H2=C7.971212
60C sp2HC=C5.10452213
61C sp2HC=N35.492119
62C sp2HC=N(+)72.6477
63C sp2H=CN32.798369
64C sp2HC=O20.741515
65C sp2H=CO16.891614
66C sp2H=CS15.224936
67C sp2HN=N55.521918
68C sp2HN=O35.4143
69C sp2H=NO40.9111
70C sp2H=NS33.8522
71C sp2C2=C3.917861
72C sp2C2=N30.473526
73C sp2C2=N(+)13.7655
74C sp2C=CN26.815748
75C sp2C=CN(+)41.6577
76C sp2C2=O15.10200161
77C sp2C=CO22.084031
78C sp2C2=S18.2133
79C sp2C=CS15.643627
80C sp2C=CF16.8122
81C sp2C=CCl11.0295
82C sp2C=CBr34.0622
83C sp2C=CJ32.4611
84C sp2=CN264.9466
85C sp2=CN2(+)60.6544
86C sp2CN=N54.512725
87C sp2CN=N(+)44.1633
88C sp2CN=O39.66234194
89C sp2C=NO42.7422
90C sp2CN=S39.8587
91C sp2C=NS34.8911
92C sp2=CNS(+)41.2922
93C sp2=CNCl38.1443
94C sp2CO=O34.06424345
95C sp2CO=O(-)80.892222
96C sp2C=OCl29.0311
97C sp2CS=S56.9733
98C sp2N2=N80.7244
99C sp2N2=N(+)65.9565
100C sp2N2=O59.577670
101C sp2N2=S66.622929
102C sp2N=NS51.622222
103C sp2NO=O52.7988
104C sp2=NO261.1211
105C sp2N=OS48.2711
106C sp2NO=S58.041111
107C sp2=NOS52.7511
108C sp2NS=S60.8353
109C sp2=NS264.3711
110C sp2O2=O41.4077
111C sp2=OS241.2222
112C sp2OS=S73.0611
113C sp2S2=S49.3955
114C aromaticH:C25.3671151269
115C aromaticH:C:N18.2015096
116C aromaticH:C:N(+)28.264828
117C aromaticH:N223.2775
118C aromaticB:C2−25.0431
119C aromatic:C35.51454155
120C aromaticC:C23.121684835
121C aromaticC:C:N11.108048
122C aromaticC:C:N(+)16.043321
123C aromatic:C2N22.21354258
124C aromatic:C2N(+)28.67169134
125C aromatic:C2:N17.037961
126C aromatic:C2:N(+)18.053520
127C aromatic:C2O20.46617387
128C aromatic:C2P−1.63124
129C aromatic:C2S16.318064
130C aromatic:C2F4.457742
131C aromatic:C2Cl12.48424166
132C aromatic:C2Br14.666343
133C aromatic:C2J20.683127
134C aromatic:C2Si4.80102
135C aromaticC:N228.8042
136C aromatic:CN:N29.72119
137C aromatic:CN:N(+)33.7432
138C aromatic:C:NO41.441312
139C aromatic:C:NO(+)33.5055
140C aromatic:C:NCl21.701813
141C aromatic:C:NBr31.3132
142C aromaticN:N243.11138
143C aromatic:N2O39.9231
144C aromatic:N2S36.0833
145C aromatic:N2Cl35.9033
146C sp=C26.3932
147C spC#C3.24147
148C spC#N16.499667
149C spC#N(+)11.3343
150C sp#CS28.0322
151C spN#N47.8011
152C sp#NP12.5331
153N sp3H2C5.032312
154N sp3H2C(pi)6.38223199
155N sp3H2N17.97108
156N sp3H2S41.9811
157N sp3HC2−23.831413
158N sp3HC2(pi)−13.517255
159N sp3HC2(2pi)−20.10200165
160N sp3HCN−0.1521
161N sp3HCN(pi)6.71149
162N sp3HCN(2pi)−6.842525
163N sp3HCS(pi)−15.102020
164N sp3C3−51.071611
165N sp3C3(pi)−53.905949
166N sp3C3(2pi)−60.807254
167N sp3C3(3pi)−61.261814
168N sp3C2N(pi)−7.0563
169N sp3C2N(+)(pi)−5.52249
170N sp3C2N(2pi)−36.3644
171N sp3C2N(+)(2pi)−20.1311
172N sp3C2N(3pi)−54.7433
173N sp3C2S−49.1342
174N sp3C2F(2pi)−64.7811
175N sp3CN2(pi)30.7443
176N sp3CN2(2pi)−49.4033
177N sp3CN2(+)(2pi)3.7211
178N sp3CNF(2pi)−34.7454
179N sp2C=C−32.777974
180N sp2C=N−4.54139
181N sp2C=N(+)−15.4355
182N sp2=CN−4.633836
183N sp2=CN(+)36.6811
184N sp2C=O−12.0499
185N sp2C=P−49.1811
186N sp2=CO−16.241813
187N sp2=CS−26.78108
188N sp2N=N12.192113
189N sp2N=O0.00106
190N sp2=NO−6.6721
191N aromatic:C2−14.01208145
192N aromatic:C:N−4.9842
193N(+) sp3H3C2.771313
194N(+) sp3H2C2−82.3633
195N(+) sp2C=CO(-)−68.6177
196N(+) sp2C=NO−26.37105
197N(+) sp2C=NO(-)−11.3033
198N(+) sp2CO=O(-)−4.38270163
199N(+) sp2=CO2(-)2.1755
200N(+) sp2NO=O(-)0.152812
201N(+) sp2O2=O(-)6.00146
202N(+) aromaticH:C2−46.7966
203N(+) aromatic:C2O(-)−7.105640
204N(+) spC#C(-)−14.3633
205N(+) sp#CO(-)0.0043
206N(+) sp=N2(-)19.1422
207OHC4.4914392
208OHC(pi)8.19560470
209OHN(pi)2.2843
210OHO29.9544
211OC2−39.239437
212OC2(pi)−31.33292201
213OC2(2pi)−24.06147121
214OCN(pi)0.0021
215OCN(+)(pi)0.00146
216OCN(2pi)4.9111
217OCO(pi)−27.1686
218OCP(pi)−16.1231
219ON2(2pi)5.8744
220ON2(+)(2pi)6.2755
221P3C316.7022
222P3S3−66.6811
223P4C3=N0.0011
224P4C3=O−30.5011
225P4C3=S46.3011
226P4O3=O0.0011
227S2HC−2.5811
228S2HC(pi)18.4722
229S2C2−22.691912
230S2C2(pi)−15.863429
231S2C2(2pi)−7.945949
232S2CN(pi)25.9611
233S2CN(2pi)−6.8266
234S2CS(pi)−6.1684
235S2CP(pi)0.0031
236S2N2−2.0011
237S2N2(2pi)21.3622
238S2NS1.0021
239S4C2=O−5.8922
240S4C2=O2−4.262727
241S4CN=O29.202020
242SiC42.0211
243SiC3Si−0.6721
244HH Acceptor−8.6310789
245AlkaneNo. of C atoms−0.5384959
246Unsaturated HCNo. of C atoms−0.102679148
ABased onValid groups1541960
BGoodness of fitR20.88871866
CDeviationAverage7.811866
DDeviationStandard10.331866
EK-fold cvK101791
FGoodness of fitQ20.86571791
GDeviationAverage (cv)8.561791
HDeviationStandard (cv)11.39 1791
Table 3. Atom Groups and their Contributions (in kJ/mol) for Heat-of-Solvation Calculations.
Table 3. Atom Groups and their Contributions (in kJ/mol) for Heat-of-Solvation Calculations.
EntryAtom TypeNeighboursContributionOccurrencesMolecules
1Const −13.33436436
2C sp3H3C−4.44483265
3C sp3H3N−31.514728
4C sp3H3N(+)−31.2211
5C sp3H3O−15.383429
6C sp3H3S−12.7974
7C sp3H2C2−3.86506186
8C sp3H2CN−31.295537
9C sp3H2CN(+)−22.6022
10C sp3H2CO−15.2617890
11C sp3H2CS−12.0396
12C sp3H2CF−6.0211
13C sp3H2CCl−8.521511
14C sp3H2CBr−11.7311
15C sp3H2CJ−13.8022
16C sp3H2O2−14.8611
17C sp3HC3−2.514535
18C sp3HC2N−29.9965
19C sp3HC2N(+)−20.7411
20C sp3HC2O−14.953229
21C sp3HC2F−5.7711
22C sp3HC2Cl−8.5311
23C sp3HC2J−14.3911
24C sp3HCF2−5.0733
25C sp3HCCl2−11.0254
26C sp3C40.431010
27C sp3C3N−24.3733
28C sp3C3O−16.2366
29C sp3C3Cl−1.2911
30C sp3C3Br1.2411
31C sp3C3J−7.5111
32C sp3C2F2−5.1222
33C sp3COF20.7411
34C sp3CF3−2.85119
35C sp3CF2Cl−3.4432
36C sp3CFCl2−12.0411
37C sp3CCl3−12.6422
38C sp2H2=C−2.931513
39C sp2HC=C−2.162620
40C sp2HC=O−16.4599
41C sp2H=CN−13.781713
42C sp2H=CO−10.2111
43C sp2H=CS−6.1321
44C sp2H=CCl−7.3453
45C sp2HN=N−10.7022
46C sp2HN=O−33.0544
47C sp2HO=O−14.4577
48C sp2C2=C1.281111
49C sp2C=CN−15.5122
50C sp2C=CN(+)−39.4811
51C sp2C2=O−17.652020
52C sp2C=CF−6.9722
53C sp2C=CCl−31.3911
54C sp2C=CBr−28.7911
55C sp2C=CJ−31.4211
56C sp2=CN2−32.4533
57C sp2CN=O−39.353030
58C sp2=CNCl−30.3311
59C sp2CO=O−17.246352
60C sp2=CF20.4432
61C sp2=CCl2−11.8922
62C sp2N2=O−35.292525
63C sp2N2=S−41.7966
64C aromaticH:C2−2.84437100
65C aromaticH:C:N−14.822918
66C aromatic:C3−3.23136
67C aromaticC:C2−1.729063
68C aromaticC:C:N−15.1376
69C aromatic:C2N−10.351313
70C aromatic:C2N(+)−21.8366
71C aromatic:C2:N−15.1911
72C aromatic:C2O−9.632117
73C aromatic:C2F−1.7911
74C aromatic:C2Cl−3.913719
75C aromatic:C2Br−5.9911
76C aromatic:CN:N−16.2011
77C spH#C−1.3711
78C spC#C0.0011
79C spC#N−17.661512
80N sp3H2C−2.402520
81N sp3H2C(pi)−16.133230
82N sp3HC224.3066
83N sp3HC2(pi)11.972622
84N sp3HC2(2pi)3.092112
85N sp3C357.5155
86N sp3C3(pi)52.51109
87N sp3C3(2pi)36.53138
88N sp2C=C−19.8122
89N aromatic:C25.381919
90N(+) sp2CO=O(-)8.851111
91OHC−17.236150
92OHC(pi)−18.293226
93OHO−22.5421
94OC28.606839
95OC2(pi)10.975649
96OC2(2pi)9.9722
97S2HC1.9844
98S2C26.6233
99S2C2(2pi)0.0011
100S2CS2.3042
101S4C2=O−33.0011
102HH Acceptor10.0222
103AlkaneNo. of C atoms0.9614223
104Unsaturated HCNo. of C atoms0.2530737
ABased onValid groups61 436
BGoodness of fitR20.9731 388
CDeviationAverage2.68 388
DDeviationStandard3.53 388
EK-fold cvK10 373
FGoodness of fitQ20.9546 373
GDeviationAverage (cv)3.22 373
HDeviationStandard (cv)4.34 373
Table 4. Atom Groups and their Contributions (in J/mol/K) for Entropy-of-Fusion Calculations.
Table 4. Atom Groups and their Contributions (in J/mol/K) for Entropy-of-Fusion Calculations.
EntryAtom TypeNeighboursContributionOccurrencesMolecules
1Const 31.1228092809
2BC312.3422
3BCO251.1155
4C sp3H3B−4.9331
5C sp3H2BC4.9331
6C sp3H3C1.9029441402
7C sp3H3N15.63279149
8C sp3H3N(+)7.0722
9C sp3H3O14.42366232
10C sp3H3P21.0733
11C sp3H3S12.933531
12C sp3H3Si8.1928346
13C sp3H2C28.4686001239
14C sp3H2CN14.85505257
15C sp3H2CN(+)19.092921
16C sp3H2CO14.52952473
17C sp3H2CP17.5032
18C sp3H2CS16.7716683
19C sp3H2CF12.3611
20C sp3H2CCl10.673024
21C sp3H2CBr11.792417
22C sp3H2CJ3.1022
23C sp3H2CSi8.506220
24C sp3H2N25.032011
25C sp3H2NO8.9887
26C sp3H2NS43.7044
27C sp3H2O222.342314
28C sp3H2S229.2175
29C sp3H2SCl22.8911
30C sp3H2Si212.0263
31C sp3HC30.64817388
32C sp3HC2N18.09117103
33C sp3HC2N(+)−9.911616
34C sp3HC2O10.63357226
35C sp3HC2S9.801813
36C sp3HC2F8.2322
37C sp3HC2Cl10.382210
38C sp3HC2Br8.9454
39C sp3HC2Si−14.0211
40C sp3HCN21.2121
41C sp3HCNO23.1476
42C sp3HCNS23.7011
43C sp3HCO219.183026
44C sp3HCOCl19.1321
45C sp3HCF24.2044
46C sp3HCFCl−10.1611
47C sp3HCCl29.01109
48C sp3HCClBr−3.8011
49C sp3C4−0.23435256
50C sp3C3N14.872220
51C sp3C3N(+)12.8665
52C sp3C3O4.638174
53C sp3C3S16.5466
54C sp3C3F18.641412
55C sp3C3Cl9.23149
56C sp3C3Br3.4422
57C sp3C3J31.1011
58C sp3C2N252.6932
59C sp3C2N2(+)4.2476
60C sp3C2NO34.6611
61C sp3C2NF47.2711
62C sp3C2NCl(+)13.3511
63C sp3C2O213.444729
64C sp3C2S210.1311
65C sp3C2F2−0.0926237
66C sp3C2Cl210.3297
67C sp3CN3(+)7.2965
68C sp3CNF26.8673
69C sp3COF2−3.5743
70C sp3CS330.5641
71C sp3CSF241.6121
72C sp3CSCl246.9022
73C sp3CF33.389176
74C sp3CF2Cl−1.5565
75C sp3CF2Br8.9443
76C sp3CFCl2−6.8932
77C sp3CCl30.921716
78C sp3NF311.0411
79C sp3O2F220.2311
80C sp3OF32.2522
81C sp3SF324.9644
82C sp3SCl346.9011
83C sp3SiCl314.2011
84C sp2H2=C5.498476
85C sp2HC=C2.46607323
86C sp2HC=N−0.814840
87C sp2H=CN3.184437
88C sp2HC=O8.291818
89C sp2H=CO5.291917
90C sp2H=CS−1.854333
91C sp2H=CCl10.1133
92C sp2H=CSi2.9233
93C sp2HN=N9.783022
94C sp2HN=O−10.2533
95C sp2H=NO21.9411
96C sp2H=NS1.0444
97C sp2HO=O14.6322
98C sp2C2=C0.30212166
99C sp2C2=N7.333533
100C sp2C2=N(+)2.3111
101C sp2C=CN−2.705145
102C sp2C=CN(+)0.0021
103C sp2C2=O1.57386298
104C sp2C=CO5.587052
105C sp2C=CS0.183825
106C sp2C=CCl3.682013
107C sp2C=CBr45.9011
108C sp2=CN212.851717
109C sp2=CN2(+)6.1411
110C sp2CN=N1.472519
111C sp2=CNO−1.4764
112C sp2CN=O0.63366234
113C sp2C=NO9.3355
114C sp2C=NS7.2077
115C sp2CN=S−2.87108
116C sp2=CNCl11.2511
117C sp2CO=O5.68718546
118C sp2CO=O(-)−16.841919
119C sp2C=OF9.7832
120C sp2C=OCl14.9721
121C sp2C=OS16.7211
122C sp2=CS2−7.29122
123C sp2=CSCl2.9332
124C sp2=CSBr−4.0311
125C sp2=CF211.6032
126C sp2=CFCl1.8711
127C sp2=CCl25.3298
128C sp2=CBr246.0511
129C sp2N2=N11.8799
130C sp2N2=O−3.489084
131C sp2N=NO3.4111
132C sp2N2=S0.553231
133C sp2N=NS−3.082323
134C sp2NO=O0.386260
135C sp2N=OS20.8622
136C sp2NO=S−2.0888
137C sp2NS=S25.2433
138C sp2=NS2−12.8622
139C sp2O2=O−9.601010
140C sp2=OS26.5311
141C aromaticB:C2−47.5155
142C aromaticH:C22.5786001498
143C aromaticH:C:N1.1710868
144C aromaticH:N2−1.1253
145C aromatic:C3−1.60481153
146C aromaticC:C2−2.5821981062
147C aromaticC:C:N5.444638
148C aromatic:C2N−0.38524389
149C aromatic:C2:N−5.263320
150C aromatic:C2N(+)4.26203144
151C aromatic:C2O2.82853532
152C aromatic:C2P−2.68125
153C aromatic:C2S0.309873
154C aromatic:C2Si3.804521
155C aromatic:C2F4.2415069
156C aromatic:C2Cl5.68860318
157C aromatic:C2Br4.739257
158C aromatic:C2J6.302619
159C aromatic:CN:N5.872827
160C aromatic:CN:N(+)0.0521
161C aromatic:C:NO3.7697
162C aromatic:C:NS2.7021
163C aromatic:C:NCl9.3888
164C aromaticN:N2−9.598540
165C aromatic:N2O−5.1642
166C aromatic:N2S−2.4355
167C aromatic:N2Cl19.0787
168C spH#C2.832623
169C spC#C−0.5218383
170C sp=C27.5444
171C spC#N2.6612094
172C sp#CSi3.4032
173C spN#N−16.1911
174C sp=N223.0711
175C sp#NO6.78104
176C sp=N=O14.0863
177N sp3H2C9.393421
178N sp3H2C(pi)7.89190160
179N sp3H2N0.9255
180N sp3H2P−16.3711
181N sp3H2S10.0777
182N sp3HC2−1.652020
183N sp3HC2(pi)−9.81190133
184N sp3HC2(2pi)4.73204169
185N sp3HCN−5.8043
186N sp3HCN(pi)−2.8586
187N sp3HCN(+)(pi)16.0642
188N sp3HCN(2pi)0.951211
189N sp3HCO(pi)30.1911
190N sp3HCP−6.8322
191N sp3HCS17.1022
192N sp3HCS(pi)9.382222
193N sp3HSi21.6772
194N sp3C3−32.044137
195N sp3C3(pi)−17.0813797
196N sp3C3(2pi)−12.64136108
197N sp3C3(3pi)4.262220
198N sp3C2N−18.1033
199N sp3C2N(pi)−6.6775
200N sp3C2N(+)(pi)20.953217
201N sp3C2N(2pi)−3.871514
202N sp3C2N(3pi)1.1766
203N sp3C2N(+)(2pi)−0.161212
204N sp3C2O−41.1055
205N sp3C2O(pi)9.253915
206N sp3C2O(2pi)29.0311
207N sp3C2P7.2411
208N sp3C2S−25.2233
209N sp3C2S(pi)−22.0711
210N sp3C2S(2pi)−6.2533
211N sp3CF2−2.1062
212N(+) sp3H2C24.331919
213N(+) sp3C3O(-)−33.0911
214N sp2H=C16.9433
215N sp2C=C−7.28122101
216N sp2C=N−11.246432
217N sp2C=N(+)10.95107
218N sp2=CN−0.513831
219N sp2=CO0.983231
220N sp2=CS−4.1732
221N sp2N=N−0.32106
222N sp2N=O18.2442
223N aromatic:C25.43222128
224N aromatic:C:N−4.6063
225N(+) sp2C=NO(-)−19.9044
226N(+) sp2CO=O(-)1.45248163
227N(+) sp2=CO2(-)−3.8811
228N(+) sp2NO=O(-)−1.334831
229N(+) sp2O2=O(-)1.8575
230N(+) spC#C(-)10.2411
231N(+) sp=N2(-)2.7663
232OHC−2.00452254
233OHC(pi)3.39478400
234OHN0.633612
235OHN(pi)−1.021919
236OHP−8.3921
237OHS60.0352
238OBC0.0055
239OBN0.0055
240OC2−4.67357135
241OC2(pi)−5.72740513
242OC2(2pi)−3.04267217
243OCN−20.3344
244OCN(pi)0.0011
245OCN(2pi)1.821211
246OCN(+)(pi)0.4775
247OCO1.8084
248OCP−6.114725
249OCP(pi)6.352017
250OCS(pi)1.1133
251OCSi−12.9452
252ON2(2pi)
253ON2(+)(2pi)0.0011
254OSi22.538424
255P3C3−6.0132
256P4C3=O−6.0711
257P4C=OF2−1.9311
258P4C=OFCl−4.9211
259P4C=OCl26.8411
260P4N2O=O6.1111
261P4NO2=O−7.4811
262P4NOS=S6.1111
263P4O3=O−5.2922
264P4O3=S−3.131312
265P4CO2=O0.0011
266P4CO2=S7.6622
267P4O2S=S−5.5277
268S2HC−0.291919
269S2HC(pi)−11.9122
270S2C2−10.107447
271S2C2(pi)1.444437
272S2C2(2pi)8.547460
273S2CN0.0033
274S2CN(pi)5.5711
275S2CS1.4984
276S2CS(pi)0.1864
277S2CP0.0088
278S2N2(2pi)−3.7111
279S4C2=O−10.4664
280S4C2=O2−10.182222
281S4CN=O21.233131
282S4CO=O20.0085
283S4C=OS4.0722
284S4N2=O24.4922
285SiH3C0.0011
286SiHC2O−77.6533
287SiHCO218.2811
288SiC4−12.052318
289SiC3O−15.58149
290SiC3Cl−8.0222
291SiC3Si−6.4263
292SiC2N20.0072
293SiC2O21.037518
294SiC2Cl2−1.7922
295SiC2Si2−10.09345
296SiCCl34.6487
297SiO413.3011
298HH Acceptor6.31153128
299Angle60 0.5412033
300Angle90 2.3713829
301Angle102 0.121131342
302Endocyclic bondsNo. of single bonds−4.425302680
ABased onValid groups188 2809
BGoodness of fitR20.8875 2701
CDeviationAverage12.33 2701
DDeviationStandard16.72 2701
EK-fold cvK10 2637
FGoodness of fitQ20.8727 2637
GDeviationAverage (cv)13.23 2637
HDeviationStandard (cv)17.93 2637
Table 5. Atom Groups and their Contributions (in J/mol/K) for Total Phase-Change Entropy Calculations.
Table 5. Atom Groups and their Contributions (in J/mol/K) for Total Phase-Change Entropy Calculations.
EntryAtom TypeNeighboursContributionOccurrencesMolecules
1Const 60.1426862686
2C sp3H3C5.3358732490
3C sp3H3N16.05126
4C sp3H3O2.66195172
5C sp3H3Si3.081105
6C sp3H2C24.0430,6502478
7C sp3H2CN−1.70286114
8C sp3H2CO−0.0135841901
9C sp3H2CS−8.016842
10C sp3H2CCl−27.4122
11C sp3H2CBr−10.2433
12C sp3H2CJ30.8811
13C sp3H2CSi−2.4863
14C sp3HC3−9.841088414
15C sp3HC2N−17.4744
16C sp3HC2O−19.96428324
17C sp3HC2S−42.591818
18C sp3HC2Cl−12.965353
19C sp3HC2Br6.9744
20C sp3HCO27.193428
21C sp3HCF2−21.831111
22C sp3C4−0.53212120
23C sp3C3O12.061010
24C sp3C3F−25.2922
25C sp3C2F24.6727257
26C sp3CSF2−1.1755
27C sp3CF3−8.306754
28C sp3OF324.1122
29C sp3SF3−196.0611
30C sp2H2=C14.815856
31C sp2HC=C−2.97946440
32C sp2HC=N−2.07922704
33C sp2HC=N(+)32.3999
34C sp2HC=O15.3266
35C sp2H=CN−16.694341
36C sp2H=CO−2.302828
37C sp2H=CS−4.6722
38C sp2H=NS74.9111
39C sp2C2=C−13.21186160
40C sp2C2=N9.171717
41C sp2C2=O2.80266202
42C sp2C=CN2.692821
43C sp2C=CO−53.382121
44C sp2C=CS−5.66340150
45C sp2C=CF31.70105
46C sp2CN=N−13.681515
47C sp2CN=O−1.75326171
48C sp2C=NO−39.684530
49C sp2CN=S−6.9586
50C sp2C=NS38.4910577
51C sp2=CNS−47.142211
52C sp2CO=O8.0731151580
53C sp2=COS128.1055
54C sp2C=OS5.469181
55C sp2=CSCl15.2799
56C sp2=CSJ10.3622
57C sp2N=NS−11.167272
58C sp2NO=O38.8066
59C sp2=NOS96.962412
60C sp2O2=O26.0633
61C aromaticH:C23.3728,6022538
62C aromaticH:C:N−0.0215182
63C aromaticH:C:N(+)−9.49126
64C aromatic:C3−8.40322107
65C aromaticC:C2−9.5879332410
66C aromaticC:C:N−38.408961
67C aromatic:C2N−13.6618661124
68C aromatic:C2N(+)−5.68135119
69C aromatic:C2:N16.733433
70C aromatic:C2O−4.2457112230
71C aromatic:C2S−29.84116105
72C aromatic:C2Si10.6042
73C aromatic:C2F4.38525266
74C aromatic:C2Cl−3.87197151
75C aromatic:C2Br2.552423
76C aromatic:C2J−35.4299
77C aromaticC:N2−43.072721
78C aromatic:C:NCl−51.4222
79C aromaticN:N2−17.8863
80C aromatic:N2O−31.1644
81C spH#C15.4011
82C spC#C−1.90929304
83C sp=C2−15.9899
84C spC#N4.72229212
85C sp#CO29.9621
86C sp=N=O0.8532
87C sp=N=S15.484242
88C sp#NS7.492626
89N sp3H2C−12.0855
90N sp3H2C(pi)−66.6666
91N sp3HC2(pi)18.61179
92N sp3HC2(2pi)−4.58233143
93N sp3HCN(pi)−6.8763
94N sp3HCN(2pi)42.991212
95N sp3HCS(pi)157.3011
96N sp3C3−75.121010
97N sp3C3(pi)−20.846433
98N sp3C3(2pi)8.123425
99N sp3C3(3pi)29.752414
100N sp2C=C14.071014778
101N sp2C=N9.88722295
102N sp2C=N(+)8.873232
103N sp2=CN−40.9120694
104N sp2=CO33.532626
105N aromatic:C218.59169125
106N aromatic:C:N17.07123
107N(+) sp2CO=O(-)0.779478
108N(+) sp2C=CO(-)−3.2799
109N(+) sp2C=NO(-)0.003232
110N(+) aromatic:C2O(-)23.3966
111OHC20.8618670
112OHC(pi)16.46202156
113OC21.7210057
114OC2(pi)−0.1239012018
115OC2(2pi)−2.5224191340
116OCN(2pi)−4.062626
117S2HC(pi)−10.1122
118S2C212.901818
119S2C2(pi)14.585542
120S2C2(2pi)15.10379314
121S4CN=O2−36.4911
122SiC3Si0.00105
123SiC2Si2−3.55455
124HH Acceptor−17.84151107
125Angle60 0.0000
126Angle90 0.0000
127Angle102 7.37513138
128Endocyclic bondsNo of single bonds−1.143024309
ABased onValid groups108 2686
BGoodness of fitR20.6094 2663
CDeviationAverage23.83 2663
DDeviationStandard31.62 2663
EK-fold cvK10 2643
FGoodness of fitQ20.5804 2643
GDeviationAverage (cv)24.65 2643
HDeviationStandard (cv)32.79 2643

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Naef, R.; Acree, W.E. Calculation of Five Thermodynamic Molecular Descriptors by Means of a General Computer Algorithm Based on the Group-Additivity Method: Standard Enthalpies of Vaporization, Sublimation and Solvation, and Entropy of Fusion of Ordinary Organic Molecules and Total Phase-Change Entropy of Liquid Crystals. Molecules 2017, 22, 1059. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules22071059

AMA Style

Naef R, Acree WE. Calculation of Five Thermodynamic Molecular Descriptors by Means of a General Computer Algorithm Based on the Group-Additivity Method: Standard Enthalpies of Vaporization, Sublimation and Solvation, and Entropy of Fusion of Ordinary Organic Molecules and Total Phase-Change Entropy of Liquid Crystals. Molecules. 2017; 22(7):1059. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules22071059

Chicago/Turabian Style

Naef, Rudolf, and William E. Acree. 2017. "Calculation of Five Thermodynamic Molecular Descriptors by Means of a General Computer Algorithm Based on the Group-Additivity Method: Standard Enthalpies of Vaporization, Sublimation and Solvation, and Entropy of Fusion of Ordinary Organic Molecules and Total Phase-Change Entropy of Liquid Crystals" Molecules 22, no. 7: 1059. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules22071059

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop