Skip to main content
ACS AuthorChoice logoLink to ACS AuthorChoice
. 2026 Jan 13;65(3):1991–2001. doi: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.5c05024

Ligand Design Criteria for the Stability of High Oxidation State Praseodymium Complexes

Tyler-Rayne Nero , Chad M Studvick , Andrew C Boggiano , Maximilian G Bernbeck , Ivan A Popov §,*, Henry S La Pierre †,∥,*
PMCID: PMC12848976  PMID: 41529178

Abstract

The isolation of high-oxidation-state lanthanide complexes requires a balance of electron-donating ligand environment, steric protection, and ligand redox stability. Herein, we report the synthesis of a new imidophosphorane ligand, NPC 2 ([NP­( t Bu)2(pyrr)]; pyrr = pyrrolidinyl), and its ability to support homoleptic Ce3+ and Pr3+ complexes that afford access to Ce4+ and electrochemically observable Pr4+ and Pr5+. The structures, electrochemistry, and computational analyses of tetrahomoleptic NPC 2 complexes of Ce3+, Ce4+, and Pr3+ are compared with previously reported analogues supported by NP * ([NP­(1,2-bis- t Bu-diamidoethane)­(NEt2)]), NPC 1 ([NP­( t Bu)­(pyrr)2]), and NPC 3 ([NP t Bu3]; t Bu = tert-butyl) ligands. Across the NPC x (x = 1–3) series, ligand substitution results in modest changes in redox potentials, consistent with minimal perturbation of the f-orbital manifold. Despite similar electronic donor properties, NPC 3 provides increased stabilization of Pr4+ and Pr5+ complexes due to enhanced steric protection, leading to improved electrochemical reversibility and chemical stability relative to complexes of NPC 1 and NPC 2 . Systematic density functional theory calculations on both experimentally isolated and nonisolated complexes rationalize the experimentally observed insensitivity of the Pr4+/3+ and Pr5+/4+ redox couples to ligand substitution across the NPC x series, while identifying steric encumbrance, electron-donating ability, and counterion-retention as key factors governing the accessibility and stabilization of high-oxidation-state lanthanide complexes.


graphic file with name ic5c05024_0009.jpg


graphic file with name ic5c05024_0007.jpg

Introduction

Understanding the ligand features that govern the stability of high-oxidation-state lanthanide complexes is essential for accessing unusual valence electronic structures in the early lanthanides. The recent isolation of a molecular Pr5+ complex represents a rare case where molecular lanthanide redox behavior mirrors that of group 5 transition metals (V, Nb, and Ta) and its actinide congener (Pa). Stabilizing the highly oxidizing Pr5+ ion enables access to redox trends predicted by the periodic table. Prior to this, Pr5+ had only been detected as a transient species in the gas phase or under matrix-isolation conditions in solid noble gases, rather than as isolable extended-solid compounds or discrete molecular complexes. However, with only one reported example, it is critical to parse the ligand characteristics that facilitated its characterization. As discussed in a recent theoretical review, the limited accessibility of high-oxidation-states within the 4f series arises from compact and deeply bound 4f orbitals, yielding the attainable oxidation state maximum within the lanthanides at Pr5+. Although high oxidation states are accessible in early lanthanides (Ce–Pr), Tb4+ is also well-known in solid state oxides and fluorides, and has recently been realized in well-defined molecular complexes.

In condensed phases, the lanthanides primarily occur in the 3+ oxidation state. Accessing higher oxidation states can afford novel reactivity, , coordination chemistry, ,,,,− separations, , and unique electronic structures that may find applications in quantum and magnetocaloric material design, as well as component ions for applications in quantum information science. Recent advances in the La Pierre and Mazzanti groups have identified two classes of ligands capable of stabilizing molecular lanthanide complexes in the 4+ oxidation state: the imidophosphorane and siloxide ligand frameworks. ,,− ,− ,− Despite these developments, isolating molecular complexes of 4+ and 5+ lanthanide ions remains a significant challenge. Expanding this class of complexes requires understanding the physical basis of their observed stability to guide the development of novel ligand frameworks to modulate electronic features and chemical reactivity.

Among the ligand classes established so far, imidophosphorane scaffolds have proven particularly effective in stabilizing high-oxidation-state lanthanide complexes and significantly shifting their redox potentials to more cathodic potentials, owing to their tunable electronic and steric properties. ,,− ,,− Imidophosphorane ligands are monoanionic 1σ/2π donors with zwitterionic character. Substituent variation at phosphorus provides access to steric control, facilitating stabilization of high-oxidation-state lanthanides and actinides. The ligand NP * ([NP­(1,2-bis- t Bu-diamidoethane)­(NEt2)]), was designed for its steric protection and electronic effects that enhance σ/π basicity; NPC 1 ([NP­( t Bu)­(pyrr)2]) for its ability to lower symmetry and reduce structural disorder; and NPC 3 ([NP t Bu3]; t Bu = tert-butyl) for its steric hindrance and potentially increased electron donation with respect to NPC 1 . ,,, The effects of ligand donors have been noted by the electrochemical differences in redox potentials, with NPC 3 achieving the most negatively reported Ce4+/3+ E pc potential (−3.01 V vs. Fc0/+), and facilitating the isolation of Pr4+ and Pr5+ complexes, and underscoring the exceptional stability conferred by this ligand framework. ,,,

Previous studies have demonstrated that the redox potentials of coordination complexes can be tuned through steric modification and incorporation of intercalated counterions. ,− In particular, alkali metal identity influences redox behavior across multiple ligand platforms. It has been shown in our earlier work that the E pa potentials of tetrahomoleptic Ce4+/3+ complexes supported by the NP * ligand shift the E pa by ∼600 mV, depending on the identity of the alkali metal counterion incorporated into the ligand framework. The thermodynamic drive for counterion ejection upon Ce4+/3+ oxidation increases with counterion size, from Li+, which resides closer to the Ce center, to Cs+, located at the periphery of the secondary coordination sphere. In this prior work, computational modeling of electrochemical data showed that oxidized structures retaining the counterion more accurately reproduced the experimental E pa values for complexes with smaller cations (Li+, Na+, K+) compared to those with larger cations (Rb+, Cs+, K+([2.2.2]-cryptand), and K+(18-crown-6)2). This trend reflects the greater structural reorganization required upon oxidation when smaller counterions are present. These findings indicate that both the counterion retention and ligand steric profile are important considerations in determining the oxidation potential of the anionic Ln3+ complexes.

In this work, we investigate how variations in ligand architecture influence the stability of high-oxidation-state praseodymium complexes, with direct comparison to their cerium analogs (Figure ). To extend our understanding of the donor characteristics of the imidophosphorane ligand, we synthesized a new series of tetrahomoleptic compounds introducing the [NP t Bu2pyrr] ligand (NPC 2 ) including, [KPr3+(NPC2)4] (1-KPr­(NPC 2 )), [KCe3+(NPC2)4] (1-KCe­(NPC 2 )), and [Ce4+(NPC2)4] (2-Ce­(NPC 2 )) (Figure B–D). These complexes were compared to previously reported tetrahomoleptic Ce and Pr complexes supported by the NPC 1 and NPC 3 ligands: [K­(2.2.2.-cryptand)]­[Ce3+(NPC1)4] (K222 = K­(2.2.2.-cryptand) (1-K222Ce­(NPC 1 )), [Ce4+(NPC1)4] (2-Ce­(NPC 1 )), [CsPr3+(NPC3)4] (1-CsPr­(NPC 3 )), [Pr4+(NPC3)4] (2-Pr­(NPC 3 )), [Pr5+(NP t Bu3)4]­[X] (X = tetrakis­(pentafluorophenyl)­borate or hexafluorophosphate) (3-Pr­(NPC 3 )), [CsCe3+(NPC3)4] (1-CsCe­(NPC 3 )), and [Ce4+(NPC3)3] (2-Ce­(NPC 3 )).

1.

1

Homoleptic imidophosphorane complexes of Pr and Ce, highlighting variations in ligand architecture. ,,,,

2.

2

(A) Synthetic route to 1-Pr­(NPC 2 ), 1-Ce­(NPC 2 ), and 2-Ce­(NPC 2 ). Truncated molecular structures determined by SC-XRD of (B) 1-Ce­(NPC 2 ), (C) 1-Pr­(NPC 2 ), and (D) 2-Ce­(NPC 2 ) with thermal ellipsoids (C = black, N = blue, P = orange, K = green, O = red, Ce/Pr = purple) shown at 50% probability. All hydrogens have been omitted for clarity.

Due to synthetic considerations, not all ligand–counterion combinations within the NPC x (x = 1, 2, 3) series could be isolated in all oxidation states. However, computational modeling enabled a complete survey across all ligand variants and oxidation states. Accordingly, density functional theory (DFT) calculations were performed on both isolated and nonisolated species across the Ce4+/3+ and Pr5+/4+/3+ systems to systematically evaluate the donor properties of NPC x ligands and assess the impact of intercalated counterions on structural and redox properties.

Results and Discussion

Synthesis

The novel ligand NPC 2 was prepared from the literature-reported di-tert-butyl­(pyrrolidinyl)­phosphine precursor, followed by conversion to the imidophosphorane using established methods (Scheme ). ,,, The 3+ complexes, 1-KPr­(NPC 2 ) and 1-KCe­(NPC 2 ), were prepared via salt metathesis between LnI3THF4 (Ln = Pr, Ce) and four equivalents of the potassium salt of the ligand, KNPC 2 , in diethyl ether, yielding crystalline solids in 64% and 94%, respectively. Oxidation of 1-KCe­(NPC 2 ) with AgI in diethyl ether affords 2-Ce­(NPC 2 ) as a crystalline solid in 53% yield (Figure A). See the Supporting Information for detailed experimental conditions and characterization (Figures S1–S32) of all compounds.

1. Synthesis of the HNPC2 and KNPC2 .

1

Structural Analysis

The structures of 1-KPr­(NPC 2 ), 1-KCe­(NPC 2 ), and 2-Ce­(NPC 2 ) were crystallographically characterized by single crystal X-ray diffraction (SC-XRD) (Figure S2B–D and Table S2). To quantify deviations from idealized four-coordinate geometries, two complementary metrics were used: (1) the τ4 parameter provides a measure of four coordinate geometry, where τ4 = 1.00 corresponds to an ideal tetrahedron and τ4 = 0.85 to a perfect trigonal pyramidal geometry, and (2) the ΣΔ109.5 parameter quantifies the degree of distortion from ideal tetrahedral geometry using the secondary P coordination sphere. For trivalent 1-KPr­(NPC 2 ) and 1-KCe­(NPC 2 ), the τ4 values (0.97 and 0.92, respectively) indicate a pseudotetrahedral geometry, while the ΣΔ109.5 values (12(3)° and 24(5)°, respectively) reveal additional distortion arising from the incorporation of the potassium cation in the secondary P coordination sphere (Table ). The potassium cation binds to the imido nitrogen atoms and is further supported by a coordinated diethyl ether molecule. The binding of the potassium cation leads to a bent Ln–N–P linkage with angles ranging from 137.3(2)° to 175.7(3)°. A comparable coordination environment is observed in 1-CsPr­(NPC 3 ), whereas 1-KPr­(NP * ) and 1-KCe­(NP * ) exhibit two-coordinate potassium ions bridged by imido nitrogen atoms. , The Ln–N bonds fall into two distinct categories: Ln–Ncapped, bound to the alkali metal, and Ln–Nterminal, coordinated solely to the metal center. For example, in 1-KCe­(NPC 2 ), the average bond length of Ln–Ncapped = 2.34(5) Å and Ln–Nterminal = 2.32(4) Å. The P–Nimido bond length averages of 1.54(2) Å are consistent with values observed in other 3+ lanthanide imidophosphorane complexes. ,,,, In contrast to the Ln3+ complexes, the Ce4+ complex, 2-Ce­(NPC 2 ), approaches ideal tetrahedral geometry with τ4 = 0.96 (Table ). Notably, the Ce–N–P angles remain comparable to those in 1-KCe­(NPC 2 ), suggesting minimal structural rearrangement upon oxidation. The P–Nimide bond lengths in 1-KCe­(NPC 2 ) and 2-Ce­(NPC 2 ) are within experimental uncertainty (1.57(4) Å vs. 1.55(1) Å, respectively), indicating no statistically significant structural change upon oxidation. The mean Ce–N bond length contracts by ∼0.17 Å, consistent with the difference in Shannon ionic radii between Ce3+ and Ce4+ (i.e., 1.01 Å vs. 0.87 Å for 6-coordinate molecules).

1. Comparison of Average Metrical Parameters of 1-KPr­(NPC 2 ), 1-CsPr­(NPC 3 ), 2-Pr­(NPC 3 ), 3-Pr­(NPC 3 ), 1-KCe­(NPC 2 ), 2-Ce­(NPC 2 ), 1-CsCe­(NPC 3 ), and 2-Ce­(NPC 3 ) Determined by SC-XRD ,

  1-KPr(NPC) 1-CsPr(NPC) 2-Pr(NPC) 3-Pr(NPC) 1-KCe(NPC) 2-Ce(NPC) 1-CsCe(NPC) 2-Ce(NPC)
Ln–Ncapped (Å) 2.31(1) 2.33(1) - - 2.34(5) - 2.333(2) -
Ln–Nterm (Å) 2.29(6) 2.313(2) - - 2.32(4) - 2.35(1) -
Ln–N (Å) 2.31(2) 2.33(1) 2.179(3) 2.25(5) 2.33(4) 2.16(4) 2.34(1) 2.176(4)
Ln–P (Å) 3.75(5) 3.81(3) 3.69(1) 3.80(3) 3.73(10) 3.67(5) 3.82(4) 3.70(1)
N–P (Å) 1.53(2) 1.552(1) 1.561(1) 1.57(1) 1.55(1) 1.57(4) 1.552(2) 1.562(3)
N–Ln–N (°) 109.4(4) 109(11) 109.5(21) 109(6) 108(15) 109(2) 109(11) 109.5(16)
Ln–N–P (°) 158(1) 160(1) 162(1) 166(3) 152(18) 158(7) 160(12) 163(1)
τ4 0.97 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.92 0.96 0.99 1.00
109.5ΘP–Ln–P(°) 12(3) 5(1) 9(2) 8(2) 24(5) 19(4) 5(1) 6(2)

The binding of alkali metals in Ln3+ imidophosphorane complexes significantly impacts oxidation potential (vide infra). NPC 3 complexes were crystallographically characterized as cesium salts, whereas NPC 2 complexes were directly obtained as potassium adducts from the ligand salt. Both systems feature a three-coordinate alkali cation, a motif observed in other Ln3+ imidophosphorane complexes, where the three-coordinate bridged alkali metal reduces electron donation to the metal, mitigating destabilization of the f-orbital manifold. We propose that the steric bulk, as well as the high symmetry, of NPC 3 reduces structural reorganization upon oxidation, reflected by the minimal structural changes observed in geometry between the Ln3+ and Ln4+ complexes. Additionally, in Ce3+ and Pr3+ NPC 3 complexes, the Cs+ counterion resides further from the metal and primarily functions as an outer sphere ion, in contrast to K+ in the corresponding NPC 2 complexes, resulting in weaker electrostatic interactions between the counterion and the anionic ligand framework.

Electrochemical Analysis

Cyclic voltammetry (CV) measurements were performed in 0.1 M [ n Bu4N]­[BPh4] in THF and referenced to Fc0/+ (see Supporting Information for experimental considerations). The redox potentials of complexes 1-KPr­(NPC 2 ), 1-KCe­(NPC 2 ), and 2-Ce­(NPC 2 ) were measured using CV (Figures S27–S29). The Ce4+/3+ couple of 2-Ce­(NPC 2 ) exhibits irreversible behavior, similar to 2-Ce­(NPC 3 ) (Figure ). The redox potentials for imidophosphorane Ce4+ compounds (Table S1) all occur at cathodic potentials (−0.16 V to −3.14 V). However, the Ce complexes supported by the NP* ligands exhibit the most positive potentials, reflecting their distinctly less electron-donating character. The oxidation and reduction potentials of Ce4+ complexes, in Table S1, supported by NPC 1 , NPC 2 , and NPC 3 ligands exist within a narrow range (E pa = −2.28 V to −2.33 V; E pc = −2.91 V to −3.22 V) and show no linear correlation with the number of t Bu substituents, indicating that such variations exert only a minor influence on the relative energy of the f-orbital energies. These effects remain ambiguous because the Ce3+ analogs feature different counterions, which, as noted earlier, can greatly impact electrochemical potenials.

3.

3

Cyclic voltammograms collected in a 0.1 M [ n Bu4N]­[BPh4] in THF. Analyte concentration is 3 mM for 1-KPr­(NPC 2 ) and 1-KCe­(NPC 2 ), and 1 mM for 1-CsPr­(NPC 3 ) and 1-CsCe­(NPC 3 ) at 200 mV/s. All potentials are referenced against Fc0/+.

The influence of the alkali metal on oxidation potential has been well studied within the NP * framework. However, in the NPC 2 and NPC 3 systems, a direct comparative series was not established across alkali metals. In contrast to the studies of Ce NP * complexes, it is not established whether these alkali metal interactions persist in solution for 1-KCe­(NPC 2 ) and 1-CsCe­(NPC 3 ) with the data at hand. However, there is a large cathodic shift in the E pa for 1-CsCe­(NPC 3 ) compared to 1-KCe­(NPC 2 ) (−2.26 V vs −1.69 V), suggesting that the identity of the counterion plays a role in the electrochemical properties of these molecules.

The Pr4+/3+ and Pr5+/4+ couples for 1-KPr­(NPC 2 ) exhibit irreversible behavior. The electrochemical redox potentials for the Pr4+/3+ couple of 1-KPr­(NPC 2 ) are E pa1 = −0.60 V and E pc1 = −1.47 V (E pa1/pc1 = first redox event), and for the Pr5+/4+ couple are an E pa2 = −0.16 V and an E pc2 = – 0.33 V (E pa2/pc2 = second redox event). In contrast, 1-CsPr­(NPC 3 ) exhibits quasi-reversible Pr4+/3+ and Pr5+/4+ redox couples but displays similar redox potentials (Table ). Notably, the redox potentials for the Pr4+/3+ and Pr5+/4+ couples in 1-KPr­(NPC 2 ) are shifted to more positive values, suggesting that higher oxidation states are less accessible, which is in agreement with the irreversible CV waves and chemically unstable products. Much like the Ce4+/3+ couple, the E pa value for the Pr4+/3+ couple in the NPC 2 complex is much more positive than the NPC 3 complex (i.e., −0.60 V vs. −1.26 V), suggesting a similar effect from the counterion.

2. Electrochemical Potentials (V) for 1-Ln­(NPC x ) (x = 1, 2, 3) and 1-Ln­(NP * ).

  E pa E pc E 1/2
1-KPr(NPC 2 ) –0.60/–0.16 –1.47/–0.33
1-CsPr(NPC 3 ) (ref ) –1.26/–0.24 –1.45/–0.35 –1.35/–0.29
1-KCe(NPC 2 ) –1.69 –3.14
1-CsCe(NPC 3 ) (ref ) –2.26 –3.01
1-KCe(NP * ) (ref ) –1.44 –2.88
a

, Values before and after the slash correspond to the Pr4+/3+ and Pr5+/4+ couples, respectively (see Table S1 to view all redox potentials, including 2-Ln­(NPC x ) and 2-Ln­(NP * )).

Chemical Oxidation of 1-KPr­(NPC2)

Attempts to oxidize 1-KPr­(NPC 2 ) with 2 equiv of FcBArF20 in d8-THF were monitored by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR). Following the reaction by 31P­{1H} NMR reveals resonances corresponding to 1-KPr­(NPC 2 ) (δ 268 ppm) and a second signal assigned to the doubly protonated ligand (δ 65 ppm) (Figure S25). Confirmation of the identity of this species was made by independent synthesis of H 2 NPC 2 . Consistent with the decomposition of the NPC 3 supported Pr5+ complex,1 attempts to generate 3-Pr­(NPC 2 ) in d8-THF revealed rapid degradation by ligand disproportionation into 2-Pr­(NPC 2 ) and the doubly protonated ligand H 2 NPC 2 . The spectroscopic evidence indicates that Pr4+(NPC2) is inaccessible and decomposes through either hydrogen atom transfer (HAT) or proton-coupled electron transfer (PCET) from solvent followed by ligand disproportionation, which parallels decomposition of the reported Pr5+ complex (Scheme S1 and Figures S24–S26).

For a given central metal ion and oxidation state, the Ln–N bond lengths differ by less than ∼0.025 Å across the three NPC ligand frameworks, e.g., Ln–N = 2.198 Å in 2-Ce­(NPC 1 ), 2.203 Å in 2-Ce­(NPC 2 ), and 2.209 Å in 2-Ce­(NPC 3 ). From another perspective, the structural differences within the NPC ligand family can be rationalized by quantifying the steric bulk of each ligand. To this end, the G-parameter was calculated for the DFT optimized structures (Figures A and S37, Table S12), a metric that has been successfully applied in previous studies to characterize ligand interactions in organometallic and coordination complexes in terms of the percentage of the metal coordination sphere shielded by a given ligand. , Essentially, the G-parameter can quantify the likelihood that an incoming solvent is sterically blocked from accessing the metal center; thus, higher values indicate greater steric protection. Among the three ligands examined across all complexes, NPC 3 consistently exhibits the largest value. For example, in the Pr5+ complexes, the G-parameter is 77.5% for the NPC 1 ligand, 79.0% for NPC 2 , and 80.5% for NPC 3 . Since the Ln–N bond lengths remain largely unchanged for complexes with the same metal ion and oxidation state, the observed increase in the G parameter is primarily attributed to the greater number of t Bu groups bound to the P atom. With increased steric protection around the metal center, the Nim atoms in the first coordination sphere are also expected to be more shielded from solvent molecules. As previously shown for the Np5+/Pu5+ complexes supported by NPC 1 , THF can participate in PCET reactions via protonation of the Nim atoms and reduction of the metal center. , The enhanced steric protection provided by the t Bu groups in NPC 3 also correlates with improved redox reversibility, rendering the Pr4+/3+ and Pr5+/4+ couples quasi-reversible, in contrast to the irreversible behavior observed with NPC 2 .

4.

4

(A) G-Parameter and (B) the electron density at the Nim nuclear critical point calculated for Ln­(NPC x ) complexes. See Figure S37 for G-parameter visualizations of selected complexes and Tables S12 and S15 for detailed values.

DFT Calculations

Due to variations in steric profiles and the presence of different counterions in the 3+ oxidation state, it is challenging to directly assess the electron-donating ability of the NPC x (x = 1, 2, 3) ligands from experimental data alone. Moreover, comparison of the bond metrics across the NPC x series does not reveal clear structural differences among the oxidized products, as the complexes exhibit comparable coordination environments. This indicates that structural metrics alone do not account for the observed differences in the NPC x series’ ability to access higher Ln oxidation states, suggesting underlying changes in electronic structure upon oxidation in addition to the steric effects. To address these uncertainties and systematically evaluate all complexes, DFT calculations were carried out (see Supporting Information for Computational Details). Specifically, we computed the experimental 1-KPr­(NPC 2 ), 1-KCe­(NPC 2 ), and 2-Ce­(NPC 2 ) compounds, as well as theoretically modeled complexes Pr 4+ (NPC 2 ) and Pr 5+ (NPC 2 ), and their respective NPC 1 and NPC 3 analogs, some of which have been reported previously (Tables S3–S5). , For consistency across this set of models, the Ln3+ complexes were initially optimized without the counterion (additional models incorporating the counterion were also considered, vide infra). The optimized structures show good geometric agreement with the experimentally characterized systems, with errors of less than 1.9% for Ln–N and N–P bond lengths and less than 2.0% for τ4 values, supporting the reliability of the computational methodology.

Natural population analysis charges (QNPA) on Nim show minimal variation of 0.01–0.03 e across the NPC 1 , NPC 2 , and NPC 3 ligands for a given oxidation state and metal identity (Figures S38–S39, Tables S13–S14). The Nim QNPA becomes slightly more positive with increasing oxidation state of Ln, e.g., shifting from −1.59 in 1-Pr­(NPC 3 ) to −1.47 in 2-Pr­(NPC 3 ), and further to −1.33 in 3-Pr­(NPC 3 ). Conversely, the Ln QNPA slightly decreases upon oxidation, with the NPC 3 ligand yielding the lowest values, suggesting it is the most electron-donating ligand among those studied. This trend aligns with previous findings by Suresh and co-workers, who identified the t Bu group as one of the most electron-donating substituents for phosphine ligands due to its favorable stereoelectronic profile. , The enhanced steric protection provided by the t Bu groups in NPC 3 is accompanied increased electron density at the Nim nuclear critical points (ρ @ Nim NCP) across all oxidation states, as determined by quantum theory of atoms in molecules (QTAIM) analysis (Figure B and Table S15). In previous works, we demonstrated that in NPC 1 complexes of U, Np, and Pu, the ρ @ Nim NCP correlates with the thermodynamic drive for PCET. , The current QTAIM results further reveal that the ρ @ Nim NCP in NPC 3 increases more significantly with increasing metal oxidation state compared to the corresponding values in NPC 1 and NPC 2 . A comparison of the Ce4+ and Pr4+ complexes shows slightly higher ρ @ Nim NCP values for the Pr species regardless of the NPC ligand framework, e.g., for NPC 3 : 194.762 |e|/Bohr3 vs. 194.782 |e|/Bohr3. Notably, the ρ @ Nim NCP values in the 3-Pr­(NPC x ) complexes (194.855–194.881 |e|/Bohr) are significantly greater than in any of the Ln4+ analogs (194.741–194.782 |e|/Bohr), consistent with the higher reactivity observed for the Pr5+ species.

Molecular orbital (MO) energy diagrams provided further insight into the electronic properties of the NPC ligands (Figures S40–S44). A distinct trend emerges in the energies of the lowest unoccupied molecular orbitals (LUMOs) across the ligand series. In all cases, the metal-dominant LUMO is found to be highest in energy for NPC 3 , regardless of the identity or oxidation state of the Ln, e.g., Pr4+: −3.06 eV (NPC 1 ) vs. −3.07 (NPC 2 ) vs. −2.93 eV (NPC 3 ). This result suggests that the reduction of the metal center is slightly less favorable in NPC 3 . While the highest occupied molecular orbital (HOMO) energies show no consistent trend across the complexes, a notable pattern is observed in the energy gap between the lowest singly occupied 4f orbital and the highest-energy ligand-dominant orbital. Previous studies proposed that the smaller 4f–ligand orbital energy gap may contribute to the enhanced stability of U3+ complexes. In the present Ce3+ and Pr3+ species, NPC 3 consistently exhibits the smallest 4f–ligand energy gap, e.g., Ce: 2.42 eV (NPC 1 ), 2.35 eV (NPC 2 ), 2.22 eV (NPC 3 ), suggesting enhanced electronic stability for the NPC 3 -ligated complexes. In the Pr4+ complexes, the singly occupied 4f-dominant orbital shifts below the ligand-dominant MOs (Figure S43). Notably, this 4f-dominant orbital of 2-Pr­(NPC 3 ) lies slightly higher in energy than that in 2-Pr­(NPC 1 ) or 2-Pr­(NPC 2 ), resulting in the smallest energy gap (1.10 eV vs. 1.08 eV vs. 1.03 eV). The reduced gap may contribute to the accessibility of the Pr5+ species, consistent with the slightly more negative calculated Pr5+/4+ redox potential: −0.30 V for NPC 3 compared to −0.24 V for NPC 2 and −0.20 V for NPC 1 (Figure S45 and Table S16). From a thermodynamic perspective, these findings suggest that the NPC 3 ligand provides a modest thermodynamic increase in stabilization of higher oxidation states relative to NPC 1 and NPC 2 .

To evaluate the effects of intercalated alkali metal ions, all complexes were further optimized with either K+ or Cs+ cations in the form [M + ]­[Ln­(NPC x )] (M = K, Cs; Ln = Ce, Pr; x = 1, 2, 3) (Tables S6–S11) with subsequent redox potential calculations. These calculations were performed under the assumption that the alkali metal cation remains associated with the complex throughout the redox processes on the electrochemical time scale (Figures S46–S48, Table S17). The computed Ln4+/3+ redox potentials for 1-KLn­(NPC 2 ) closely match the experimental E pa values (Ce: −1.71 V (theor.) vs. −1.69 V (exp.); Pr: −0.68 V (theor) vs. −0.60 V (exp.)), supporting the K+ retention upon oxidation. In contrast, the computed Ln4+/3+ redox potentials for 1-CsLn­(NPC 3 ) show substantial deviations from the experimental E pa values (Ce: −1.71 V (theor.) vs. −2.26 V (exp.); Pr: −0.70 V (theor.) vs. −1.26 V (exp.)), suggesting that Cs+ is likely ejected during the oxidation process. These findings are consistent with our previous study on Ce­(NP * ) complexes, which also demonstrated retention of smaller and loss of larger alkali metal cations during oxidation. Comparing the three NPC ligands in 1-Ln­(NPC x ), the redox potentials vary by only 0.14 V for both Ce and Pr, becoming slightly more positive from NPC 1 to NPC 3 . This suggests slightly greater electronic stabilization in the 1-KLn­(NPC 3 ) complexes. This trend is consistent with the MO diagrams of 1-KLn­(NPC x ) (Figures S49 and S50), which show that the 4f-dominant orbitals gradually stabilize by 0.09–0.12 eV from NPC 1 to NPC 3 . Additionally, when compared to the systems without counterions, it can be seen that K+ intercalation lowers the HOMO energy in [K + ]­[1-Ln­(NPC x )] by 0.71–0.73 eV for both Ce and Pr analogs. A similar trend is observed with Cs+ as the intercalated counterion (Figures S51 and S52).

The calculated Ln4+/3+ redox potentials for the cation-free Ln­(NPC x ) complexes (Table S16) are much closer to the experimentally observed values for the complexes containing intercalated Cs+. For example, the computed Ce4+/3+ redox potential for Ce­(NPC 3 ) is −2.57 V, which falls between the experimental E pa (−2.26 V) and E pc (−3.01 V) for 1-CsCe­(NPC 3 ). This result suggests that Cs+, which resides at a greater distance from the Ln center, is more readily ejected during oxidation, consistent with the more negative redox potentials observed compared to the K+-containing systems. Although the HOMO stabilization in the Cs+-intercalated species is comparable to that in the K+ analogues, the larger Cs+ ion is more favorable for stabilizing these systems as it leads to more negative redox potentials.

The calculated vertical/adiabatic detachment energies (VDE/ADE) and vertical/adiabatic electron affinities (VEA/AEA) benchmark the degree of structural rearrangement associated with the redox processes (vertical, none; adiabatic, total) (Table S18). For the Ln4+/3+ couples of the cation-free Ln­(NPC x ) complexes, the differences between the vertical and adiabatic processes are generally largest for complexes with the NPC 1 ligand and smallest for those with NPC 3 . For example, in Ce4+/3+, |VDE – ADE| decreases from 0.68 V (NPC 1 ) to 0.57 V (NPC 2 ) and 0.49 V (NPC 3 ). This indicates that complexes with the NPC 1 ligand undergo greater structural reorganization upon oxidation, likely due to the increased flexibility of the pyrrolidinyl rings. In contrast, the bulky t Bu groups in NPC 3 impose greater rigidity on the secondary coordination sphere, limiting structural rearrangement. Inclusion of K+ or Cs+ preserves this pattern while slightly reducing |VDE–ADE| by an average of 0.03–0.08 V across the considered complexes. Overall, these results indicate that, for complexes retaining the alkali metal, its coordination enforces an asymmetric geometry for the Ln3+ species, whereas the Ln4+ analogue remains highly symmetric, thereby minimizing the extent of structural reorganization upon oxidation. This effect is more pronounced for the sterically rigid NPC 3 ligand, which exhibits the smallest structural response relative to the more flexible NPC 1 analogue.

To assess the thermodynamic stabilization afforded by the alkali cations, we calculated the energy required to eject K+ and Cs+ from 1 M + Ln­(NPC x ) following the dissociation pathway [Lnq+(NPC x )]­[M+] → [Lnq+(NPCx)] + [M+] (Figure and Table S19). As only implicit solvation was included through polarized continuum model and no explicit solvent molecules were coordinated, the analysis focuses on relative energy values rather than absolute energies. The results show that retaining K+ is thermodynamically more favorable than retaining Cs+ by 10.4–12.7 kcal/mol for Ce3+ and 11.1–12.9 kcal/mol for Pr3+ across the three NPC ligands. Although Cs+ binding remains more favorable in all Ce3+ and Pr3+ complexes of 1-CsLn­(NPC x ) compared to their Ln4+ counterparts, it is notably easier to dissociate Cs+ from the NPC 3 ligand compared to NPC 1 and NPC 2 , with energy differences of 3.0–6.9 kcal/mol in Ln3+ complexes. This trend likely arises from the partial negative charge on the nitrogen atoms in the pyrrolidine rings of NPC 1 , which enhances interaction with the Cs+ cation. A similar trend is observed in the 1-KLn­(NPC x ) series, though with slightly smaller energy differences across the three ligands, 0.7–5.1 kcal/mol. Likewise, in the 4+ oxidation state, 2-Ln­(NPC x ), ligands with pyrrolidine substituents (NPC 1 and NPC 2 ) exhibit relatively more favorable interactions with the cation than NPC 3 , by 4.7–9.2 kcal/mol for K+ and 8.0–11.5 kcal/mol for Cs+. Taken together, these results suggest that the NPC 3 ligand offers the most favorable thermodynamic profile for cation ejection regardless of the oxidation state or metal identity.

5.

5

Energy (kcal/mol) required to eject (A) [K+] and (B) [Cs+] in the dissociation pathway [Lnq+(NPC x )]­[M+]→ [Lnq+(NPCx)] + [M+]. See Table S19 for detailed values.

Conclusions

Achieving high-oxidation-states in lanthanide and actinide compounds requires a careful balance of electron donation, steric protection, and ligand redox stability. The strongly electron-donating NPC imidophosphorane ligand class can effectively support complexes featuring electron-deficient Ce and Pr centers. Ligand substitutions within the NPC x (x = 1, 2, 3) family result in subtle variations in redox potentials, differing by no more than 0.14 V for the Ln4+/3+ couples and 0.10 V for the Pr5+/4+ couples across the three ligands. This result aligns with the modest impact these substitutions have on the relative energies of the f-orbital manifold. Among them, NPC 3 stands out as the best ligand for stabilizing higher oxidation states due to a combination of electronic and steric factors. From a thermodynamic perspective, NPC 3 exhibits only slightly more negative Pr5+/4+ redox potentials, indicating somewhat easier oxidation compared to NPC 1 and NPC 2 . Geometrically, the bulky t Bu groups of NPC 3 provide enhanced steric protection, which may reduce undesired interactions with solvent molecules despite the ligand’s highest electron density at the Nim center across the three NPC x ligands. The enhanced steric profile of NPC 3 may also contribute to the improved reversibility of the Pr4+/3+ and Pr5+/4+ couples compared to NPC 2 .

Our results also reinforce the critical role of counterions in modulating the redox behavior of the Ln4+/3+ couples. Consistent with previous studies, we demonstrate that alkali metal cations in NPC x -stabilized complexes contribute to the electronic stabilization and significantly influence oxidation potentials, depending on their size and proximity to the metal center. ,, Larger counterions, which tend to occupy the outer coordination sphere, shift redox potentials to more negative values, thereby facilitating more facile metal-centered oxidation. Additionally, the bulky alkyl substituents in NPC 3 and lack of secondary nitrogen sites to bind alkali metals enable easier counterion dissociation compared to NPC 1 and NPC 2 analogues, with minimal structural reorganization observed upon Ln4+/3+ oxidation.

Experimental Details

General Considerations

Unless otherwise noted, all reagents were obtained from commercial suppliers, and all syntheses and manipulations were conducted with the exclusion of oxygen and water using Schlenk techniques under Ar or in a N2 filled glovebox (Vigor, <0.1 ppm of O2/H2O). Benzyl potassium (KBn), di-tert-butyl­(pyrrolidinyl)­phosphine, and [H­(OEt2)]­[BArF20], CeI3(THF)4, and PrI3(THF)4 were prepared as previously described. Further considerations and experimental details can be found in the Supporting Information

Caution!

Trimethylsilyl azide (TMSN3) is toxic and explosive under certain conditions and should be handled in a well-ventilated fume hood or a glovebox with appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE).

HNP­( t Bu)2(pyrr) (HNPC2)

Inside a glovebox, ( t Bu)2(pyrr)P (3.512 g, 16 mmol) was transferred to a 100 mL Schlenk pear flask equipped with a Teflon stir bar and dissolved in 40 mL of toluene. Trimethylsilyl azide (4.3 mL, 33 mmol) was then added to the solution, and the flask was sealed. The flask was transferred to a Schlenk line, and the reaction mixture was stirred at reflux for 2 h. Volatiles were removed in vacuo to give a turbid, colorless oil. Inside a glovebox, the crude material was extracted in 20 mL of hexane and filtered through a fine-porosity frit packed with Celite. Volatiles were removed in vacuo from the colorless filtrate to yield the TMSNPC intermediate as a colorless oil. The intermediate was analyzed via NMR (see below) and was determined to be of sufficient purity to proceed to the second step. 1H NMR (400 MHz, C6D6): δ 3.09 (t, 4H), 1.43 (t, 4H), 1.15 (d, 8H), 0.38 (s, 9H). 13C­{1H} NMR (101 MHz, C6D6): δ 49.19, 39.69, 38.91, 28.07, 26.36, 4.76. 31P­{1H} NMR (162 MHz, C6D6): δ 29.75. Inside a glovebox, the oil was transferred to a Schlenk pear flask equipped with a Teflon stir bar. The vessel was cycled onto a Schlenk line and 25 mL of methanol (0.62 mol) was added via cannula, followed by 2 drops of concentrated, aqueous H2SO4. The reaction mixture was sealed and then stirred at room temperature for 24 h. The volatiles were then removed in vacuo to give the crude product as a colorless oil. The oil was transferred to a vial in the glovebox, and 2 mL of pentane and 2 mL of diethyl ether were added sequentially to give a cloudy, white suspension. The vial was placed in a −35 °C freezer overnight, during which time XRD-quality colorless crystals grew. The supernatant was decanted off, and the residual volatiles were removed in vacuo to give the title compound as a white crystalline solid (3.30 g, 88%). On warming to room temperature, the material becomes waxy. 1H NMR (500 MHz, C6D6): δ 3.70 (s, 1H), 3.13 (t, 4H), 1.43 (t, 4H), 1.21 (d, 18H). 13C­{1H} NMR (126 MHz, C6D6): δ 49.70, 39.06, 38.51, 28.10, 26.53. 31P­{1H} NMR (203 MHz, C6D6): δ 55.34. IR (ATR) ν [cm–1] = 2958 (s), 2901 (s), 2869 (s), 1977 (vw), 1589 (w), 1476 (m), 1399 (w), 1373 (w), 1295 (vw), 1257 (vw), 1200 (m), 1146 (m), 1124 (m), 1076 (vs), 1016 (vs), 991 (s), 962 (m), 945 (m), 872 (vw), 814 (s), 755 (vw), 725 (vw), 645 (m), 602 (s), 580 (m), 524 (m), 465 (m). Elemental analysis, C12H27N2P, found (calculated): C 63.02 (62.57), H 11.25 (11.82), N 12.32 (12.16).

KNP­( t Bu)2(pyrr) (KNPC2)

Inside a glovebox, HNPC2 (575.8 mg, 2.50 mmol) was dissolved in 10 mL toluene. Then potassium benzyl (341.9 mg, 2.63 mmol) was added as a solid, and the mixture was stirred for 3 h. During the course of the reaction, a dark orange/brown precipitate was formed. The precipitate was filtered away on a coarse-porosity frit and washed with toluene (5–10 mL). The combined filtrates were concentrated to 5 mL in vacuo and cooled overnight in −35 °C freezer to yield colorless crystals of the title complex (581.6 mg, 83%). 1H NMR (400 MHz, THF-d 8 ): δ 3.34 (t, 4H), 1.65 (t, 4H), 1.18 (d, 18H). 13C­{1H} NMR (101 MHz, THF-d 8 ): δ 48.87, 39.77, 39.19, 29.23, 25.72. 31P­{1H} NMR (162 MHz, THF-d 8 ): δ 10.76. IR (ATR) ν [cm–1] = 2942 (m), 2885 (m), 2856 (m), 2034 (vw), 1977 (vw), 1496 (vw), 1475­(vw), 1455 (vw), 1384 (vw), 1375 (vw), 1351 (vw), 1340 (vw), 1285 (vw), 1188 (m), 1153 (vs), 1127 (m), 1048 (m), 986 (s), 932 (w), 804 (s), 732 (m), 697 (m), 612 (s), 581 (s), 519 (m), 475 (m). Elemental analysis, KC13.75H28N2P, found (calculated): C 56.71 (56.66), H 9.63 (9.68), N 9.78 (9.61).

[H2NP­( t Bu)2(pyrr)]­[BArF20] (H2NPC2)

Inside the glovebox, HNPC2 (46 mg, 198 μmol) was dissolved in 2 mL Et2O in a 20 mL scintillation vial charged with a Teflon stir bar. [H­(OEt2)2]­[BArF20] (164 mg, 198 μmol) was dissolved in 3 mL of Et2O and added to the reaction vial, and the reaction mixture was stirred for 1 h. Volatiles were removed in vacuo, resulting in white solids. The solid was triturated with n-pentane (1 mL × 3). The solid was brought up in 1 mL of Et2O and filtered through a pipet packed with Celite and glass fiber filter paper. The solution was concentrated in vacuo to 0.2 mL and placed in a −35 °C freezer overnight to yield clear needle XRD quality crystals (174 mg, 95%). 1H NMR (400 MHz, THF-d 8 ): δ 1.45 (d, 18H), 1.95 (t, 4H), 3.44 (t, 4H), 4.97 (s, 2H). 13C­{1H} NMR (101 MHz, THF-d 8 ): δ 50.87, 39.83, 39.20, 27.06.19F­{1H} NMR (376 MHz, THF-d 8 ): δ −133.06, −165.50, −168.89. 31P­{1H} NMR (162 MHz, THF-d 8 ): δ 69.25. IR (ATR) ν [cm–1] = 2942 (s), 2862 (s), 2804 (m), 1643 (w), 1591 (vw), 1513 (m), 1491 (w), 1462 (s), 1370 (m), 1275 (w), 1251 (w), 1209 (w), 1103 (s), 996 (m), 978 (s), 910 (w), 812 (vw), 774 (w), 756 (w), 746 (vw), 684 (w), 661 (w), 603 (vw), 563 (m). Elemental analysis, C44H40BF24N2P, found (calculated): C 48.45 (48.28), H 3.71 (3.68), N 2.84 (2.56).

K­[Ce3+NP t Bu2pyrr]4 (1-KCe­(NPC2))

Inside a glovebox, CeI3THF4 (151 mg, 187 μmol, 1.0 equiv) was added to a 20 mL scintillation vial charged with a glass stir bar and 1 mL diethyl ether was then added. KNPC2 (201 mg, 749 μmol, 4.0 equiv) was added as a solid, and any residual ligand was transferred as slurry in 1 mL diethyl ether. The reaction mixture was stirred overnight and filtered through a pipet filter packed with glass filter paper and Celite. The solvent was concentrated in vacuo, and the resulting pale-yellow oil was triturated with n-pentane (1 mL × 3). The residue was taken up in 2 mL of n-pentane and filtered through a pipet packed with Celite and glass fiber filter paper. The solution was concentrated in vacuo and then 5–10 drops of diethyl ether were added, and the solution was then placed in a −35 °C freezer overnight, during which time pale-yellow XRD quality crystal grew (194 mg, 94%). 1H NMR (400 MHz, THF-d8): δ 0.59 (s, 16H), 0.30 (d, 72H), −0.68 (s, 16H). 13C­{1H} NMR (126 MHz, C6D6): δ 44.10, 29.17, 26.61, 25.18. 31P­{1H} NMR (162 MHz, C6D6): δ 99.77. IR (ATR) ν [cm–1] = 3015 (m), 2946 (m), 2863 (m), 2147 (vw), 2129 (vw), 2042 (vw), 1971 (vw), 1587 (w), 1473 (m), 1379 (m), 1354 (w), 1303 (w), 1289 (ww),1127 (s), 1053 (s), 994 (s), 808 (s), 742 (w), 701 (w), 625 (s), 593 (s), 539 (s), 502 (w) 475 (s),413 (w). Elemental analysis, KCeC48H104N8P4, found (calculated): C 52.83 (52.57), H 9.80 (9.56), N 9.72 (10.22).

[Ce4+NP t Bu2pyrr]4 (2-Ce­(NPC2))

Inside a glovebox, CeI3THF4 (145 mg, 179 μmol) was added to a 20 mL scintillation vial charged with a Teflon stir bar and 1 mL diethyl ether. KNPC (193 mg, 718 μmol) was added as a solid, and any residual ligand was transferred as a slurry in 1 mL diethyl ether. The reaction mixture was stirred overnight, then AgI (44 mg, 189 μmol) was added and stirred for 3 h. The reaction mixture was then filtered through a pipet filter packed with glass filter paper and Celite. The solvent was removed in vacuo, and the resulting pale-yellow oil was triturated with n-pentane (1 mL × 3). The waxy residue was taken up in 2 mL of n-pentane and concentrated in vacuo and placed in a −35 °C freezer overnight, during which time, bright yellow/orange XRD quality crystal grew to give the title compound (101 mg, 53%). 1H NMR (500 MHz, C6D6): δ 3.56 (t, 16H), 1.70 (t, 16H), 1.47 (d, 72H). 13C­{1H} NMR (126 MHz, C6D6): δ 49.39, 40.74, 40.21, 29.17, 26.56. 31P­{1H} NMR (202 MHz, C6D6): δ 7.58. IR (ATR) ν [cm–1] = 3016 (m), 2950 (m), 2864 (m), 2211 (vw), 2131 (vw), 2046 (vw), 1304 (w), 1088 (s), 998 (s), 809 (s), 633 (s), 602 (m), 556 (m), 507 (m), 474 (w), 411 (w). Elemental analysis, CeC48H104N8P4, found (calculated): C 54.33 (54.52), H 10.12 (9.91), N 10.55 (10.60).

K­[Pr3+NP t Bu2pyrr]4 (1-KPr­(NPC2))

Inside a glovebox, PrI3THF4 (145 mg, 309 μmol) was added to a 20 mL scintillation vial charged with a Teflon stir bar and 1 mL diethyl ether. KNPC (192 mg, 716 μmol) was added as a solid, and any residual ligand was transferred as a slurry in 1 mL diethyl ether. The reaction mixture was stirred overnight and filtered through a pipet filter packed with glass filter paper and Celite. The solvent was concentrated in vacuo, and the resulting pale-yellow oil was triturated with n-pentane (1 mL × 3). The waxy residue was taken up in 2 mL of n-pentane and filtered through a pipet packed with Celite and glass fiber filter paper. The solution was concentrated in vacuo and then 5–10 drops of diethyl ether were added and the reaction mixture was placed in a −35 °C freezer overnight. During this time light-yellow XRD quality crystal grew to give the title compound (125 mg, 64%). 1H NMR (400 MHz, C6D6): δ −0.38 (t, 16H), −1.78 (d, 72H), −3.12 (t, 16H). 13C­{1H} NMR (126 MHz, C6D6): δ 48.04,38.48, 23.37, 23.27. 31P­{1H} NMR (162 MHz, C6D6): δ 274. IR (cm–1) = 3016 (m), 2209 (vw), 2164 (vw), 2134 (vw), 2030 (vw), 2017 (vw), 1975 (vw), 1304 (m), 577 (m), 503 (m), 438 (w), 421 (w), 410 (w). Elemental analysis, C48H104KN8P4Pr, found (calculated): C 50.88 (52.54), H 9.49(9.55), N 9.49 (10.21). Carbon is low on multiple analyses. University of Iowa elemental analysis facility cannot use a catalyst with air-sensitive samples, and the burn temperature is likely to low for complete combustion.

Computational Details

All [Ln­(NPC x )] q and [M+]­[Ln­(NPC x )]q+1 (M = K, Cs; x = 1, 2, 3; Ln = Ce and q = −1, 0; and Ln = Pr and q = −1, 0, 1) complexes were fully optimized in the gas phase without any constraints. Starting geometries were based on the XRD structures, when available. For Ln4+ and Pr5+ complexes which included an alkali metal counterion, the starting geometry was based on the optimized geometry of the Ln3+ complex with the intercalated alkali cation. The starting geometry for the Pr3+(NPC1) and Pr4+(NPC1) complexes were based on the optimized geometry for the Ce3+(NPC1) and Ce4+(NPC1) complexes while the starting geometry for the Pr5+(NPC1) complex was the optimized Pr4+(NPC1) complex. Geometry optimizations were carried out using the TPSSh , DFT functional as implemented in the Gaussian16 software package (version A.03). The ECP28MWB small core quasi-relativistic pseudopotential and ECP28MWB_ANO , basis set was used to describe Ce and Pr in all complexes. The ECP46MWB small core quasi-relativistic pseudopotential and ECP46MWB basis set was used to describe the Cs+ cation. All remaining atoms were described with the all-electron Pople basis set 6–311G­(d). This computational protocol has previously yielded excellent agreement with experimental observables for closely related NPC systems, including accurate reproduction of solid-state structures, redox potentials, and spectroscopic properties across lanthanide and actinide complexes, thereby supporting its reliability in describing the lanthanide NPC systems investigated in this work. ,,,,,

G-parameters were calculated via the Solid-G program. In this methodology, the ligand solid angle (Ω=Ar2) is used to calculate the percentage of a sphere of arbitrary radius shielded by a ligand, G=100Ω4π , which provides a quantifiable definition for steric bulk. Specifically, GM(complex) describes the percentage of the metal M coordination sphere shielded by all ligands.

Natural population analysis (NPA) charges were calculated via the natural bond orbital version 7 (NBO7) code of Foster and Weinhold , as implemented in Gaussian 16. The electron density at the N atom was calculated via the quantum theory of atoms in molecules (QTAIM) as implemented in Multiwfn. Molecular orbital diagrams were plotted using single point THF calculations from Gaussian and the program Chemissian v4.67.

Redox potentials were calculated via the revised Born–Haber cycle with all redox potentials referenced to a calculated absolute half-cell potential of a ferrocene couple Fc0/+ in THF using the self-consistent reaction field approach based on the integral equation formalism of the polarized continuum model for implicit solvent. The TPSSh functional and LANL08 , basis set was used for Fe, while C/H atoms were described by the 6–311G­(d) basis set.

Metal-ion ejection thermodynamics were evaluated using single-point electronic energies computed in THF, combined with zero-point and thermal corrections obtained from gas-phase optimized geometries. The following chemical equation was used to calculate the adiabatic dissociation energy [Lnq+(NPC x )]­[M+] --> [Lnq+(NPC x )] + [M+].

Supplementary Material

ic5c05024_si_001.pdf (4.2MB, pdf)

Acknowledgments

The experimental work was supported by a National Science Foundation (NSF) CAREER grant under award no. 1943452 (TRN, ACB, HSL). HSL is an Alfred P. Sloan Research Fellow. IAP acknowledges startup funds and the Meyer Early Career Launch Fellowship at Washington State University (WSU). Computational work was performed using the ARCC HPC cluster at the University of Akron and the Kamiak HPC cluster at the Center for Institutional Research Computing at WSU.

The Supporting Information is available free of charge at https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.inorgchem.5c05024.

  • Experimental considerations, NMR and UV–vis–NIR spectra, electrochemical, crystallographic data, computational methodology, G-parameter calculation, and natural population analysis (PDF). The optimized geometries (XYZ coordinates) for all computed structures have been deposited at the figshare repository and are accessible (via DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.30338485 PDF)

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

References

  1. Boggiano A. C., Studvick C. M., Roy Chowdhury S., Niklas J. E., Tateyama H., Wu H., Leisen J. E., Kleemiss F., Vlaisavljevich B., Popov I. A., La Pierre H. S.. Praseodymium in the Formal + 5 Oxidation State. Nat. Chem. 2025;17:1005–1010. doi: 10.1038/s41557-025-01797-w. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Zhang Q., Hu S. X., Qu H., Su J., Wang G., Lu J. B., Chen M., Zhou M., Li J.. Pentavalent Lanthanide Compounds: Formation and Characterization of Praseodymium­(V) Oxides. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2016;55(24):6896–6900. doi: 10.1002/anie.201602196. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Su J., Hu S., Huang W., Zhou M., Li J.. On the oxidation states of metal elements in MO3 – (M = V, Nb, Ta, Db, Pr, Gd, Pa) anions. Sci. China Chem. 2016;59(4):442–451. doi: 10.1007/s11426-015-5481-z. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  4. Willson S. P., Andrews L.. Characterization of the Reaction Products of Laser-Ablated Early Lanthanide Metal Atoms with Molecular Oxygen. Infrared Spectra of LnO, LnO+, LnO–, LnO2, LnO2 +, LnO2 –, LnO3 –, and (LnO)2 in Solid Argon. J. Phys. Chem. A. 1999;103(17):3171–3183. doi: 10.1021/jp990005m. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  5. Hu S. X., Jian J., Su J., Wu X., Li J., Zhou M.. Pentavalent lanthanide nitride-oxides: NPrO and NPrO– complexes with NPr triple bonds. Chem. Sci. 2017;8(5):4035–4043. doi: 10.1039/C7SC00710H. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Ye L. W., Hu H. S., Schwarz W. H. E., Li J.. Physical Origin and Periodicity of the Highest Oxidation States in Heavy-Element Chemistry. Acc. Chem. Res. 2025;58(12):1903–1912. doi: 10.1021/acs.accounts.5c00233. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Rice N. T., Popov I. A., Russo D. R., Bacsa J., Batista E. R., Yang P., Telser J., La Pierre H. S.. Design, Isolation, and Spectroscopic Analysis of a Tetravalent Terbium Complex. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2019;141(33):13222–13233. doi: 10.1021/jacs.9b06622. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Willauer A. R., Palumbo C. T., Scopelliti R., Zivkovic I., Douair I., Maron L., Mazzanti M.. Stabilization of the Oxidation State + IV in Siloxide-Supported Terbium Compounds. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2020;59(9):3549–3553. doi: 10.1002/anie.201914733. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Xue T., Ding Y. S., Jiang X. L., Tao L., Li J., Zheng Z.. Tetravalent Terbium Chelates: Stability Enhancement and Property Tuning. Precis. Chem. 2023;1(10):583–591. doi: 10.1021/prechem.3c00065. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Palumbo C. T., Zivkovic I., Scopelliti R., Mazzanti M.. Molecular Complex of Tb in the + 4 Oxidation State. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2019;141(25):9827–9831. doi: 10.1021/jacs.9b05337. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Tricoire M., Hsueh F. C., Keener M., Rajeshkumar T., Scopelliti R., Zivkovic I., Maron L., Mazzanti M.. Siloxide tripodal ligands as a scaffold for stabilizing lanthanides in the + 4 oxidation state. Chem. Sci. 2024;15(18):6874–6883. doi: 10.1039/D4SC00051J. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Willauer A. R., Douair I., Chauvin A. S., Fadaei-Tirani F., Bünzli J. C. G., Maron L., Mazzanti M.. Structure, reactivity and luminescence studies of triphenylsiloxide complexes of tetravalent lanthanides. Chem. Sci. 2022;13(3):681–691. doi: 10.1039/D1SC05517H. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Gompa T. P., Ramanathan A., Rice N. T., La Pierre H. S.. The chemical and physical properties of tetravalent lanthanides: Pr, Nd, Tb, and Dy. Dalton Trans. 2020;49(45):15945–15987. doi: 10.1039/D0DT01400A. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Tateyama H., Boggiano A. C., Liao C., Otte K. S., Li X., La Pierre H. S.. Tetravalent Cerium Alkyl and Benzyl Complexes. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2024;146(15):10268–10273. doi: 10.1021/jacs.4c01964. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Boggiano A. C., Chowdhury S. R., Roy M. D., Bernbeck M. G., Greer S. M., Vlaisavljevich B., La Pierre H. S.. A Four-Coordinate Pr4+ Imidophosphorane Complex. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2024;63(43):e202409789. doi: 10.1002/anie.202409789. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Xue T., Ding Y. S., Zheng Z.. A tetravalent praseodymium complex with field-induced slow magnetic relaxation. Dalton Trans. 2024;53(13):5779–5783. doi: 10.1039/D4DT00052H. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Willauer A. R., Palumbo C. T., Fadaei-Tirani F., Zivkovic I., Douair I., Maron L., Mazzanti M.. Accessing the + IV Oxidation State in Molecular Complexes of Praseodymium. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2020;142(12):5538–5542. doi: 10.1021/jacs.0c01204. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Ramanathan A., Walter E. D., Mourigal M., La Pierre H. S.. Increased Crystal Field Drives Intermediate Coupling and Minimizes Decoherence in Tetravalent Praseodymium Qubits. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2023;145(32):17603–17612. doi: 10.1021/jacs.3c02820. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Bertaina S., Gambarelli S., Tkachuk A., Kurkin I. N., Malkin B., Stepanov A., Barbara B.. Rare-earth solid-state qubits. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2007;2(1):39–42. doi: 10.1038/nnano.2006.174. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Ramanathan A., Kaplan J., Sergentu D. C., Branson J. A., Ozerov M., Kolesnikov A. I., Minasian S. G., Autschbach J., Freeland J. W., Jiang Z., Mourigal M., La Pierre H. S.. Chemical design of electronic and magnetic energy scales of tetravalent praseodymium materials. Nat. Commun. 2023;14(1):3134. doi: 10.1038/s41467-023-38431-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Ramanathan A., Leisen J. E., La Pierre H. S.. In-Plane Cation Ordering and Sodium Displacements in Layered Honeycomb Oxides with Tetravalent Lanthanides: Na2LnO3 (Ln = Ce, Pr, and Tb) Inorg. Chem. 2021;60(3):1398–1410. doi: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.0c02628. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Rice N. T., Popov I. A., Carlson R. K., Greer S. M., Boggiano A. C., Stein B. W., Bacsa J., Batista E. R., Yang P., La Pierre H. S.. Spectroscopic and electrochemical characterization of a Pr4+ imidophosphorane complex and the redox chemistry of Nd3+ and Dy3+ complexes. Dalton Trans. 2022;51(17):6696–6706. doi: 10.1039/D2DT00758D. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Pandey P., Keener M., Rajeshkumar T., Scopelliti R., Sienkiewicz A., Zivkovic I., Maron L., Mazzanti M.. Accessing homoleptic neutral and anionic five-coordinate Pr­(IV) siloxide complexes. Chem. Sci. 2025;16:21056–21067. doi: 10.1039/D5SC05500H. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Réant B. L. L., Duggan S. G., Seed J. A., Miró P., Goodwin C. A. P.. Synthesis, Redox Chemistry, and Electronic Structures of Bis-di­(silylamido)­silane f-Element Complexes. Inorg. Chem. 2025;64:21465–21478. doi: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.5c03345. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Rice N. T., Popov I. A., Russo D. R., Gompa T. P., Ramanathan A., Bacsa J., Batista E. R., Yang P., La Pierre H. S.. Comparison of tetravalent cerium and terbium ions in a conserved, homoleptic imidophosphorane ligand field. Chem. Sci. 2020;11(24):6149–6159. doi: 10.1039/D0SC01414A. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Otte K. S., Niklas J. E., Studvick C. M., Boggiano A. C., Bacsa J., Popov I. A., La Pierre H. S.. Divergent Stabilities of Tetravalent Cerium, Uranium, and Neptunium Imidophosphorane Complexes. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2023;62(34):e202306580. doi: 10.1002/anie.202306580. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Boggiano A. C., Studvick C. M., Steiner A., Bacsa J., Popov I. A., La Pierre H. S.. Structural distortion by alkali metal cations modulates the redox and electronic properties of Ce3+ imidophosphorane complexes. Chem. Sci. 2023;14(42):11708–11717. doi: 10.1039/D3SC04262F. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Rice N. T., Su J., Gompa T. P., Russo D. R., Telser J., Palatinus L., Bacsa J., Yang P., Batista E. R., La Pierre H. S.. Homoleptic Imidophosphorane Stabilization of Tetravalent Cerium. Inorg. Chem. 2019;58(8):5289–5304. doi: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.9b00368. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Niklas J. E., Studvick C. M., Bacsa J., Popov I. A., La Pierre H. S.. Ligand Control of Oxidation and Crystallographic Disorder in the Isolation of Hexavalent Uranium Mono-Oxo Complexes. Inorg. Chem. 2023;62(5):2304–2316. doi: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.2c04056. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Boggiano A. C., Niklas J. E., Bernbeck M. G., La Pierre H. S.. U4+/5+/6+ in a Conserved Pseudotetrahedral Imidophosphorane Coordination Sphere. Inorg. Chem. 2025;64(5):2489–2495. doi: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.4c04973. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Morimoto Y., Kotani H., Park J., Lee Y. M., Nam W., Fukuzumi S.. Metal Ion-Coupled Electron Transfer of a Nonheme Oxoiron­(IV) Complex: Remarkable Enhancement of Electron-Transfer Rates by Sc3+ . J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2011;133(3):403–405. doi: 10.1021/ja109056x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Sankaralingam M., Lee Y. M., Pineda-Galvan Y., Karmalkar D. G., Seo M. S., Jeon S. H., Pushkar Y., Fukuzumi S., Nam W.. Redox Reactivity of a Mononuclear Manganese-Oxo Complex Binding Calcium Ion and Other Redox-Inactive Metal Ions. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2019;141(3):1324–1336. doi: 10.1021/jacs.8b11492. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Yoon H., Lee Y. M., Wu X., Cho K. B., Sarangi R., Nam W., Fukuzumi S.. Enhanced Electron-Transfer Reactivity of Nonheme Manganese­(IV)–Oxo Complexes by Binding Scandium Ions. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2013;135(24):9186–9194. doi: 10.1021/ja403965h. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Lionetti D., Suseno S., Shiau A. A., de Ruiter G., Agapie T.. Redox Processes Involving Oxygen: The Surprising Influence of Redox-Inactive Lewis Acids. JACS Au. 2024;4(2):344–368. doi: 10.1021/jacsau.3c00675. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Leseberg J., Gompa T., Mikeska E., Oliver A., Day V., La Pierre H. S., Blakemore J.. Redox Tuning of Metals with High Coordination Numbers: Quantifying Systematic Charge Density Effects of Co-encapsulated Cations. ChemRxiv. 2025 doi: 10.26434/chemrxiv-2024-sbzfx-v2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  36. Robinson J. R., Carroll P. J., Walsh P. J., Schelter E. J.. The Impact of Ligand Reorganization on Cerium­(III) Oxidation Chemistry. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2012;51(40):10159–10163. doi: 10.1002/anie.201203481. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Levin J. R., Dorfner W. L., Carroll P. J., Schelter E. J.. Control of cerium oxidation state through metal complex secondary structures. Chem. Sci. 2015;6(12):6925–6934. doi: 10.1039/C5SC02607E. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Robinson J. R., Gordon Z., Booth C. H., Carroll P. J., Walsh P. J., Schelter E. J.. Tuning Reactivity and Electronic Properties through Ligand Reorganization within a Cerium Heterobimetallic Framework. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2013;135(50):19016–19024. doi: 10.1021/ja410688w. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Mikeska E. R., Blakemore J. D.. Differentiating Ligand Tailoring and Cation Incorporation as Strategies for Tuning Heterobimetallic Cerium Complexes. Chem.Eur. J. 2025;31(32):e202500474. doi: 10.1002/chem.202500474. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Clarke M. L., Holliday G. L., Slawin A. M. Z., Woollins J. D.. Highly electron rich alkyl- and dialkyl-N-pyrrolidinyl phosphines: an evaluation of their electronic and structural properties. J. Chem. Soc., Dalton Trans. 2002;(6):1093–1103. doi: 10.1039/b108467d. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  41. Yang L., Powell D. R., Houser R. P.. Structural variation in copper­(I) complexes with pyridylmethylamide ligands: structural analysis with a new four-coordinate geometry index. τ4. Dalton Trans. 2007;(9):955–964. doi: 10.1039/b617136b. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Höpfl H.. The tetrahedral character of the boron atom newly defineda useful tool to evaluate the N→B bond. J. Organomet. Chem. 1999;581(1–2):129–149. doi: 10.1016/S0022-328X(99)00053-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  43. Shannon R. D.. Revised effective ionic radii and systematic studies of interatomic distances in halides and chalcogenides. Acta Cryst. A. 1976;32(5):751–767. doi: 10.1107/S0567739476001551. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  44. Guzei I. A., Wendt M.. An improved method for the computation of ligand steric effects based on solid angles. Dalton Trans. 2006;(33):3991–3999. doi: 10.1039/b605102b. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Cowley R. E., Holland P. L.. Ligand Effects on Hydrogen Atom Transfer from Hydrocarbons to Three-Coordinate Iron Imides. Inorg. Chem. 2012;51(15):8352–8361. doi: 10.1021/ic300870y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Kahan R. J., Farnaby J. H., Tsoureas N., Cloke F. G. N., Hitchcock P. B., Coles M. P., Roe S. M., Wilson C.. Sterically encumbered mixed sandwich compounds of uranium­(III): Synthesis and reactivity with small molecules. J. Organomet. Chem. 2018;857:110–122. doi: 10.1016/j.jorganchem.2017.10.038. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  47. Otte K. S., Niklas J. E., Studvick C. M., Montgomery C. L., Bredar A. R. C., Popov I. A., La Pierre H. S.. Proton-Coupled Electron Transfer at the Pu5+/4+ Couple. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2024;146(31):21859–21867. doi: 10.1021/jacs.4c06319. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Niklas J. E., Otte K. S., Studvick C. M., Roy Chowdhury S., Vlaisavljevich B., Bacsa J., Kleemiss F., Popov I. A., La Pierre H. S.. A tetrahedral neptunium­(V) complex. Nat. Chem. 2024;16(9):1490–1495. doi: 10.1038/s41557-024-01529-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Suresh C. H., Koga N.. Quantifying the Electronic Effect of Substituted Phosphine Ligands via Molecular Electrostatic Potential. Inorg. Chem. 2002;41(6):1573–1578. doi: 10.1021/ic0109400. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Mathew J., Thomas T., Suresh C. H.. Quantitative Assessment of the Stereoelectronic Profile of Phosphine Ligands. Inorg. Chem. 2007;46(25):10800–10809. doi: 10.1021/ic701547h. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Reinhart E. D., Studvick C. M., Tondreau A. M., Popov I. A., Boncella J. M.. Synthesis and Characterization of Uranium Complexes Supported by Substituted Aryldimethylsilylanilide Ligands. Organometallics. 2024;43(3):284–298. doi: 10.1021/acs.organomet.3c00458. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  52. Johnson S. A., Kiernicki J. J., Fanwick P. E., Bart S. C.. New Benzylpotassium Reagents and Their Utility for the Synthesis of Homoleptic Uranium­(IV) Benzyl Derivatives. Organometallics. 2015;34(12):2889–2895. doi: 10.1021/acs.organomet.5b00212. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  53. Gompa T. P., Rice N. T., Russo D. R., Aguirre Quintana L. M., Yik B. J., Bacsa J., La Pierre H. S.. Diethyl ether adducts of trivalent lanthanide iodides. Dalton Trans. 2019;48(23):8030–8033. doi: 10.1039/C9DT00775J. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Staroverov V. N., Scuseria G. E., Tao J., Perdew J. P.. Comparative assessment of a new nonempirical density functional: Molecules and hydrogen-bonded complexes. J. Chem. Phys. 2003;119(23):12129–12137. doi: 10.1063/1.1626543. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Staroverov V. N., Scuseria G. E., Tao J., Perdew J. P., Erratum J. P.. Erratum: “Comparative assessment of a new nonempirical density functional: Molecules and hydrogen-bonded complexes” [J. Chem. Phys. 119, 12129 (2003)] J. Chem. Phys. 2004;121(22):11507. doi: 10.1063/1.1795692. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  56. Frisch, M. J. ; Trucks, G. W. ; Schlegel, H. B. ; Scuseria, G. E. ; Robb, M. A. ; Cheeseman, J. R. ; Scalmani, G. ; Barone, V. ; Petersson, G. A. ; Nakatsuji, H. ; Li, X. ; Caricato, M. ; Marenich, A. V. ; Bloino, J. ; Janesko, B. G. ; Gomperts, R. ; Mennucci, B. ; Hratchian, H. P. ; Ortiz, J. V. ; Izmaylov, A. F. ; Sonnenberg, J. L. ; Williams; Ding, F. ; Lipparini, F. ; Egidi, F. ; Goings, J. ; Peng, B. ; Petrone, A. ; Henderson, T. ; Ranasinghe, D. ; Zakrzewski, V. G. ; Gao, J. ; Rega, N. ; Zheng, G. ; Liang, W. ; Hada, M. ; Ehara, M. ; Toyota, K. ; Fukuda, R. ; Hasegawa, J. ; Ishida, M. ; Nakajima, T. ; Honda, Y. ; Kitao, O. ; Nakai, H. ; Vreven, T. ; Throssell, K. ; Montgomery, J. A., Jr. ; Peralta, J. E. ; Ogliaro, F. ; Bearpark, M. J. ; Heyd, J. J. ; Brothers, E. N. ; Kudin, K. N. ; Staroverov, V. N. ; Keith, T. A. ; Kobayashi, R. ; Normand, J. ; Raghavachari, K. ; Rendell, A. P. ; Burant, J. C. ; Iyengar, S. S. ; Tomasi, J. ; Cossi, M. ; Millam, J. M. ; Klene, M. ; Adamo, C. ; Cammi, R. ; Ochterski, J. W. ; Martin, R. L. ; Morokuma, K. ; Farkas, O. ; Foresman, J. B. ; Fox, D. J. . Gaussian 16. Rev. A.03: Wallingford, CT, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  57. Dolg M., Stoll H., Preuss H.. Energy-adjusted ab initio pseudopotentials for the rare earth elements. J. Chem. Phys. 1989;90(3):1730–1734. doi: 10.1063/1.456066. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  58. Cao X., Dolg M.. Segmented contraction scheme for small-core lanthanide pseudopotential basis sets. J. Mol. Struct. THEOCHEM. 2002;581(1–3):139–147. doi: 10.1016/S0166-1280(01)00751-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  59. Cao X., Dolg M.. Valence basis sets for relativistic energy-consistent small-core lanthanide pseudopotentials. J. Chem. Phys. 2001;115(16):7348–7355. doi: 10.1063/1.1406535. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  60. Unpublished : Bergner, A. , Arbeitsbericht 1990. [Google Scholar]
  61. Leininger T., Nicklass A., Küchle W., Stoll H., Dolg M., Bergner A.. The accuracy of the pseudopotential approximation: non-frozen-core effects for spectroscopic constants of alkali fluorides XF (X = K, Rb, Cs) Chem. Phys. Lett. 1996;255(4–6):274–280. doi: 10.1016/0009-2614(96)00382-X. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  62. Krishnan R., Binkley J. S., Seeger R., Pople J. A.. Self-consistent molecular orbital methods. XX. A basis set for correlated wave functions. J. Chem. Phys. 1980;72(1):650–654. doi: 10.1063/1.438955. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  63. Foster J. P., Weinhold F.. Natural hybrid orbitals. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1980;102(24):7211–7218. doi: 10.1021/ja00544a007. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  64. Weinhold, F. ; Landis, C. R. . Valency and Bonding: A Natural Bond Orbital Donor-Acceptor Perspective; Cambridge University Press, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  65. Bader R. F. W.. Atoms in molecules. Acc. Chem. Res. 1985;18(1):9–15. doi: 10.1021/ar00109a003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  66. Lu T., Chen F. M.. Multiwfn: A multifunctional wavefunction analyzer. J. Comput. Chem. 2012;33(5):580–592. doi: 10.1002/jcc.22885. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. Skripnikov, L. Chemissian v4.67.
  68. Roy L. E., Jakubikova E., Guthrie M. G., Batista E. R.. Calculation of One-Electron Redox Potentials Revisited. Is It Possible to Calculate Accurate Potentials with Density Functional Methods? J. Phys. Chem. A. 2009;113(24):6745–6750. doi: 10.1021/jp811388w. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Cancès E., Mennucci B., Tomasi J.. A new integral equation formalism for the polarizable continuum model: Theoretical background and applications to isotropic and anisotropic dielectrics. J. Chem. Phys. 1997;107(8):3032–3041. doi: 10.1063/1.474659. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  70. Cancès E., Mennucci B.. New applications of integral equations methods for solvation continuum models: ionic solutions and liquid crystals. J. Comput. Chem. 1998;23(3–4):309–326. doi: 10.1023/A:1019133611148. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  71. Mennucci B., Cancès E., Tomasi J.. Evaluation of Solvent Effects in Isotropic and Anisotropic Dielectrics and in Ionic Solutions with a Unified Integral Equation Method: Theoretical Bases, Computational Implementation, and Numerical Applications. J. Phys. Chem. B. 1997;101(49):10506–10517. doi: 10.1021/jp971959k. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  72. Hay P. J., Wadt W. R.. Ab initio effective core potentials for molecular calculations. Potentials for K to Au including the outermost core orbitals. J. Chem. Phys. 1985;82(1):299–310. doi: 10.1063/1.448975. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  73. Roy L. E., Hay P. J., Martin R. L.. Revised Basis Sets for the LANL Effective Core Potentials. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2008;4(7):1029–1031. doi: 10.1021/ct8000409. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

ic5c05024_si_001.pdf (4.2MB, pdf)

Articles from Inorganic Chemistry are provided here courtesy of American Chemical Society

RESOURCES