Figure shows an energy diagram of 1d-H, displaying a meta-insertion product with a relatively high yield. The thermal stability of the para-insertion product precursor exceeded that of meta-insertion, indicating kinetic control of the reaction. The maximum ΔG ‡ from II to pro2,3 of the meta-insertion product was calculated to be 9.42 kcal mol -1 . In contrast, the maximum ΔG ‡ for para-insertion to yield pro3,4 was calculated to be 18.46 kcal mol -1 . This observation indicates that the formation of meta-insertion products is significantly faster than that of para-insertion products. Again, the reaction is kinetically controlled. Similarly, the energy diagram of 1a-H (the unprotected form of 1a-TFA) demonstrates a faster formation of the metainsertion product compared to the para-insertion product (Figure ). A comparison between the two energy diagrams (Fig- ) revealed that the ΔG ‡ for the process of pro2,3 from II is 9.42 kcal mol -1 for 2a-H, while that for 1a-TFA is 18.67 kcal mol -1 . These differences suggest that the cyclopropane ring formed at the 2,3-positions is less likely to cleave with 1a-TFA than with 2a-H, possibly due to differences in electron density affecting the bond cleavage ease of the cyclopropane ring at the 2,3-positions.