Comments

Overall - 86% A great report. The layout was a bit cramped and hard to follow, and sometimes things were not discussed fully, overall good though!

Cyclopentadiene 5.5/8

Really nice figures, but a confusing layout with table 1 in the next section! Otherwise good and great explanation but the discussion was a bit brief. More discussion of the transition state would have been good, and hydrogenation.

Taxol 12/12

All values correct and great discussion inc olefinic strain.

Spectroscopy 19/25

I think you tried to do too much here and missed some key points. It’s great that you modelled both and came to the conclusion of which is more likely by comparing the differences to the literature, but you should have included tables of NMR values, and most importantly, discussed the reasoning for any differences seen. Why is there such a large deviation next to the sulphur? Great graphs but more discussion required.

Epoxide

NMR 4/5

Why didn’t you do all of the enantiomers?! Fine to do one, but say why!

Crystal structure 3.5/5

Shi-Again, why? You state some facts but don’t give any reasoning. Jacobsen-good

Absolute Configuration 32/35

TS

Great! Would have been nice to include some calculations though!

ORP

Good. In table you have data that is ‘inferred to be’… what does this mean? If you couldn’t find it, say that! Don’t present data that isn’t real!

QTAIM, NCI, Suggestion 10/10

All excellent. Great suggestion.