The
phenomenon of antiaromaticity–aromaticity interplay
in aromatic–antiaromatic (A–aA)-fused systems is studied
using molecular electrostatic potential (MESP) analysis, which clearly
brings out the electron-rich π-regions of molecular systems.
Benzene, naphthalene, phenanthrene, and pyrene are the aromatic units
and cyclobutadiene and pentalene are the antiaromatic units considered
to construct the A–aA-fused systems. The fused system is seen
to reduce the antiaromaticity by adopting a configuration containing
the least number of localized bonds over antiaromatic moieties. This
is clearly observed in 25 isomers of a fused system composed of three
naphthalene and two cyclobutadiene units. Denoting the number of π-bonds
in the cyclobutadiene rings by the notation (n, n′), the systems belonging to the class (0, 0) and
(2, 2) turn out to be the most and least stable configurations, respectively.
The stability of the fused system depends on the empty π-character
of the antiaromatic ring, hence naphthalene and benzene prefer to
fuse with cyclobutadiene in a linear and angular fashion, respectively.
Generally, a configuration with the maximum number of ‘empty’
rings (0, 0, 0, ...) is considered to be the most stable for the given
A–aA system. The stability and aromatic/antiaromatic character
of A–aA-fused systems with pentalene is also interpreted in
a similar way. MESP topology, clearly bringing out the distribution
of double bonds in the fused systems, leads to a simple interpretation
of the aromatic/antiaromatic character of them. Also, it leads to
powerful predictions on stable macrocyclic A–aA systems.