Substrate Fe(110) | Medium 1 M HCl | DFT level B3LYP/6-311++G(d,p) (ddCOSMO:water) | Generated 2026-07-18 19:37
The molecules modelled here are screened in silico as representative candidates, not a verified analysis of any real sample. Confirm the actual composition experimentally (e.g. by LC-MS/GC-MS) before drawing firm conclusions.
1. Overview
corrosim pipeline
2. Summary & ranking
Of the 3 molecules screened, pyrazolopyrimidine propanamide ranks highest on the composite electronic score (+0.44), which averages three independent axes — a small HOMO–LUMO gap (4.66 eV), the Lukovits ΔN and the molecular dipole — the strongest all-round electron-donating profile of the set. It adsorbs flat on Fe in the physisorption regime (E_ads ≈ -16 kJ/mol). The lead holds across all 4 descriptor bases evaluated (geometry and protonation). This is a computational screening prediction requiring electrochemical confirmation (see the Method section and caveats).
Pyrazolopyrimidine propanamide
Pyrazolopyrimidine ethyl ester
Pyrazolopyrimidine propanoic acid
Gap (eV)
4.665
4.659
4.655 ✓
ΔN
0.171
0.168
0.166
Dipole (D)
6.542
4.602
3.63
E_ads (kJ/mol)
-15.55
-8.81
-20.42 ✓
Fe–O (Å)
3.95
3.95
3.75
Score
0.442 ✓
-0.082
-0.36
Ranking basis
Top candidate
force-field geometry, neutral
Pyrazolopyrimidine propanamide
force-field geometry, pH-weighted
Pyrazolopyrimidine propanamide
DFT-relaxed geometry, neutral
Pyrazolopyrimidine propanamide
DFT-relaxed geometry, pH-weighted
Pyrazolopyrimidine propanamide
Lead robust: the same candidate tops all 4 descriptor bases (geometry and protonation).
Scored on three independent axes of the canonical basis (DFT-relaxed geometry, pH-weighted; z-scored; higher = stronger): the HOMO–LUMO gap, the Lukovits ΔN (electron donation to the metal) and the dipole (a weak tie-breaker — its direction vs efficiency is disputed). The geometry / protonation panels below are a sensitivity check, not separate rankings. E_ads and the Fe–O distance validate the lead, they do not enter the score. Full method: docs/pipeline.md.
3. DFT electronic descriptors
Modelled moleculesFrontier-orbital energies vs the metal work function
3.1 Frontier-orbital isosurfaces (HOMO / LUMO)
pyrazolopyrimidine propanoic acid HOMOpyrazolopyrimidine propanamide HOMOpyrazolopyrimidine ethyl ester HOMO
Sensitivity: descriptors on the DFT-relaxed geometry (the geometry axis of the ranking ensemble). The headline ranks on the canonical basis; see the Summary.
Optimised protonated cations (in-acid)
Descriptor
Pyrazolopyrimidine propanoic acid+H+
Pyrazolopyrimidine propanamide+H+
Pyrazolopyrimidine ethyl ester+H+
Formula
C15H15N4O3+
C15H16N5O2+
C17H19N4O3+
HOMO (eV)
-7.202
-6.938
-7.208
LUMO (eV)
-2.798
-2.412
-2.786
Gap ΔE (eV)
4.404
4.526
4.422
η hardness (eV)
2.202
2.263
2.211
σ softness (1/eV)
0.454
0.442
0.452
χ electronegativity (eV)
5.0
4.675
4.997
ω electrophilicity (eV)
5.677
4.829
5.648
ΔN
-0.041
0.032
-0.04
E_back-donation (eV)
-0.551
-0.566
-0.553
Dipole (D)
TNC
-4.329
-4.458
-4.903
3.5 Species in the acidic medium (protonated cation)
Descriptor
Pyrazolopyrimidine propanoic acid+H+
Pyrazolopyrimidine propanamide+H+
Pyrazolopyrimidine ethyl ester+H+
Formula
C15H15N4O3+
C15H16N5O2+
C17H19N4O3+
HOMO (eV)
-6.978
-6.736
-6.965
LUMO (eV)
-3.071
-2.902
-3.024
Gap ΔE (eV)
3.908
3.834
3.941
η hardness (eV)
1.954
1.917
1.97
σ softness (1/eV)
0.512
0.522
0.507
χ electronegativity (eV)
5.025
4.819
4.994
ω electrophilicity (eV)
6.46
6.056
6.329
ΔN
-0.052
0.0
-0.044
E_back-donation (eV)
-0.488
-0.479
-0.493
Dipole (D)
TNC
-4.247
-4.562
-4.704
Protonated +1 cation descriptors in 1 M HCl; a component of the pH-weighted canonical basis (see the Summary), shown here on its own.
3.6 Speciation in 1 M HCl (pH ≈ -0.0)
97% neutral / 3% protonated at this pH — the neutral form dominates. Population-weighted descriptors (the speciation axis of the ranking ensemble; the headline ranks on the canonical basis):
Descriptor
Pyrazolopyrimidine propanoic acid
Pyrazolopyrimidine propanamide
Pyrazolopyrimidine ethyl ester
Formula
C15H14N4O3
C15H15N5O2
C17H18N4O3
HOMO (eV)
-6.319
-6.303
-6.313
LUMO (eV)
-1.866
-1.842
-1.859
Gap ΔE (eV)
4.454
4.46
4.454
η hardness (eV)
2.227
2.23
2.227
σ softness (1/eV)
0.449
0.449
0.449
χ electronegativity (eV)
4.092
4.072
4.086
ω electrophilicity (eV)
3.777
3.732
3.764
ΔN
0.162
0.167
0.164
E_back-donation (eV)
-0.557
-0.558
-0.557
Dipole (D)
3.252
6.198
3.351
TNC
-4.008
-4.278
-4.569
3.7 Local reactivity (Fukui)
Strongest electron-donating oxygens (highest f⁻) per molecule:
DFT level: B3LYP/6-311++G(d,p) (ddCOSMO:water). Global descriptors come from the frontier-orbital energies via Koopmans' theorem; ΔN uses the metal work function with η(metal) = 0. The Monte-Carlo and Brownian-MD stages use a classical van-der-Waals adsorption model — a physics-based screening surrogate, not a substitute for periodic DFT or for electrochemical validation. The composite ranking is a heuristic that orders candidates; it does not prove inhibition. Full methodology: docs/pipeline.md; validation record: docs/validation.md.