Comments

Overall - 78%

Cyclopentadiene 7/8

Great intro. Really nice figures, well done. Great discussion of results and nice addition of a reference to other computational studies. Why is the angle bending energy such a big difference? Looking into the angles and their deviation from ideality could be included. Otherwise, good reasoning.

Taxol 11/12

Great, all structures modelled nicely and a good discussion. Again, looking at bond angles would have been useful for a better explanation of the strain.

Spectroscopy 21/25

Really good. Nicely laid out. Good graph to clearly depict the differences between literature and experimental values. This should have been included for 1H too! The reason for the large deviation in C 14 is heavy atom coupling. Have a look into this. You would need to apply a spin-orbit correction here.

Epoxide

NMR 0/5

You haven't done the NMR for the epoxides!

Crystal structure 2/5

Shi-You should have included all of the Mercury Conquest figures, with bond lengths annotated to show what you mean. What do you mean 'the shortening of the anomeric C-O bond is insignificant'? This implies you've done something to see statistical significance. If so, include it. If not, it's not insignificant if you've seen shortening, so you should provide a reason for this. You haven't given any reasoning for what you've seen here. Jacobsen-Where is the space filling model? Why not include this?!

Absolute Configuration 34/35

TS

Great! Analysis is really thorough and it's well presented :)

ORP

Nice!

VCD

How useful is this for your compounds? Fine to use, but discuss it's usefulness.

QTAIM, NCI, Suggestion 3/10

NCI, QTAIM - should have actually discussed these! Suggestion - good, but it's very hard to epoxidise a a tetra subs alkene!