Skip to main content
. 2023 Jan 10;19:36–56. doi: 10.3762/bjoc.19.4

Table 5.

Comparison of the besta functionals for 1a34[O].

MAD/RMSD (ppm)

Opt/NMRb P3 and P4 training set 1a34[O] P–P: 810 1a–7, 1134[O] P=C: 1a, 8PB, 21–26 28PA, 9–20, 2734[O]

M06-2X/B3LYP 6.5/8.0 7.1/9.9 15.6/18.5 5.4/7.1 9.7/14.0 6.4/8.5
M06-2X/ M06-2X 4.1/5.7 10.3/16.3 13.7/18.8 9.7/15.7 29.1/32.8 5.4/7.1
PBE0/PBE0c 7.8/9.7 8.2/12.3 d 6.9/8.5 8.5/12.9 6.6/8.2 8.7/13.1
M06-2X/M06-L 7.2/8.8 7.5/9.3 9.3/10.7 7.2/9.0 8.2/9.6 7.4/9.2
M06-2X/TPSSTPSS*e 6.7/8.2 8.7/12.1 11.8/13.1 8.0/11.8 17.2/20.7 6.4/8.4
M06-2X/ωB97x-D 5.9/7.3 6.8/9.1 11.6/13.8 5.8/7.9 10.4/13.9 5.9/7.4
ωB97x-D/ωB97x-D 6.1/7.5 7.4/9.4 11.0/13.3 6.6/8.4 9.8/12.6 6.7/8.3
M06-2X/PBE0 5.8/7.1 6.9/8.5 10.8/13.0 6.1/7.2 8.4/10.7 6.5/7.7

aBest results are in bold. bFunctionals for optimization (6-31+G(d,p) basis set) and NMR (6-311+G(2d,p) basis set), both with CHCl3 solvation (IEF-PCM) except as noted. cOptimization and NMR following Latypov, gas phase and 6-31+G(d) and 6-311G(2d,2p) basis sets, respectively. dWithout 32, MAD/RMSD = 7.1/8.6 ppm. eCSGT NMR method; all others are GIAO.