Feedback

General introduction to what you plan to do in this expt.

cyclopentadiene

Good results but somewhat minimal discussion. You could develop the theme of kinetic vs thermodynamic control, and the factors behind the large difference in bending energies of the hydrogenated system etc.

Taxol

9* is the wrong (trans) stereochemistry) and the isomers of the alkene are not really relevant either. More discussion of eg atropisomerism, and hyperstable alkenes would have been good.

Spectroscopy

Table 4 is headed as a comparison with the literature, but there is no literature values in the table! Likewise table 5. What were your conformations you used for the calculations (I could not see any model for 17 or 18). Table 6 is not a particularly good way of presentating the calculations. You should chart the DIFFERENCE between calculation and expt, not the chemical shift. Table 7 is not relevant. There was little discussion of the spectroscopy as such

Epoxides =

X-ray structures

The bond lengths should be discussed in relation to the anomeric effect,causes by alignment of a lone pair with a C-O bond. You show this in the diagram, but do not discuss this in relation to the x-ray structures.

Spectra

Again, no actual comparison between your calculations and the actual spectra for which you do not report any lit values.

Absolute configurations

Table 9, The lit values for S,s stilbene oxide and R,R are very different in magnitude. They should differ ONLY in sign. You do not discuss this. Equally your calculated values are not equal but opposite, very much not so in fact. All of this needed discussion.

The VCD and ECD has no lit values at all, and so in a sense the calculations are pointless. Your discussion does not reflect this.

TS

Table 11, more detail of how you processed the numbers. How did you select the energy difference? How did you calculate the relative populations? Did the ee agree with the literature? Again, much more discussion needed

NCI

You have a nice disgram, but the two line discussion is very general and merely recapitulates what the course notes say.

QTAIM

Likewise, a quite general discussion

Candidate

Good one, but is the synthesis from HOOH stereospecific, or are the two diastereomers merely somehow separated?

Overall, quite thin discussion in almost all areas.