“…In support of their claim of SF in their variously substituted thienyl analogs of 2, the authors quote results of DFT calculations of the relative size of ÄE(T 1 ) and ÄE(S 1 ), acknowledging that they will be modified in the solid. 62 The computational results are systematically biased in favor of SF by the authors' choice to use vertical excitation energies for ÄE(S 1 ) and adiabatic excitation energies for ÄE(T 1 ). For illustration, consider the results for isolated 2 at the B3LYP/6-311G level: for ÄE(S 1 ), the adiabatic value is 2.31 and the vertical, 2.42 eV, and for ÄE(T 1 ), the values are 1.20 and 1.23 eV.…”