Okay, so I need to figure out how many of these compounds are optically active. The question gives me eight different compounds, and I have to count how many of them exhibit optical activity. The options are A (4), B (3), C (5), D (2). Alright, let's take each compound one by one and analyze them.

Starting with the first compound: (Z)-1-chloro-2-methylbut-1-ene. Hmm, optical activity depends on the presence of a chiral center, right? So first, I need to check if this molecule has any chiral centers or if it has a plane of symmetry that makes it achiral despite having stereogenic centers. The structure here is Z configuration, so the substituents on the double bond are in a specific arrangement. Wait, but wait, wait. Wait, but but-1-ene. The structure is Cl-CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2-CH2? No, wait. Wait, but-1-ene is CH2=CHCH2CH2Cl? No, wait. Let me draw this out. The compound is 1-chloro-2-methylbut-1-ene. So the double bond is between C1 and C2. Structure would be Cl-CH2-C(=CH2)-CH3? Wait, no. Wait, but-1-ene is CH2=CHCH2CH2-, but here the substituents are at C1 and C2. So the structure is CH2Cl attached to C1, and C2 has a methyl group. Wait, perhaps the structure is Cl-CH2-C(CH3)=CH2? Wait, that doesn't make sense. Wait, but-1-ene is CH2=CHCH2CH3. So replacing the first CH2 with Cl would make it Cl-CH2-CH2-CH2-CH2, but with a double bond at position 1. Wait, maybe I'm confused. Let's clarify. The formula for but-1-ene is CH2=CHCH2CH3. So substituting the first carbon with a chlorine and the second with a methyl group. So the structure would be Cl-CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2-CH3? Wait, no, but-1-ene is CH2=CHCH2CH3. So the double bond is between C1 and C2. So the first carbon (C1) is CH2Cl, the second carbon (C2) is CH(CH3), and the rest are CH2 and CH3. Wait, but that would make the structure Cl-CH2-C(CH3)=CH2? Wait, no. Wait, the double bond is between C1 and C2. So the structure is Cl-CH2-CH2-CH2-CH3? Wait, but that's butane. Wait, no, but-1-ene would have the double bond between C1 and C2. So for 1-chloro-2-methylbut-1-ene, the structure is Cl attached to C1 (which is part of the double bond), and a methyl group attached to C2 (the other end of the double bond). So the structure is Cl-CH2-C(CH3)=CH2? Wait, no. Wait, the double bond is between C1 and C2. So C1 is CHCl, and C2 is CH(CH3). Wait, but that would be Cl-CH2-C(CH3)=CH2. Wait, that can't be right because the double bond would be between C1 and C2, so the structure is Cl-CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2-CH3? No, that's not right. Wait, maybe the structure is Cl attached to the double bond. So the molecule is CH2Cl-CH(CH3)=CH2-CH3? Wait, but that would be 2-methyl-1-chloro-1-pentene? No, wait. Wait, but the name is but-1-ene. So four carbons in total. So the structure should be Cl-CH2-C(CH3)=CH2. Wait, but that would be four carbons: Cl-CH2-C(CH3)=CH2. Wait, but the formula would be Cl-CH2-C(CH3)=CH2. So the double bond is between C2 and C3. Wait, but but-1-ene is CH2=CHCH2CH3. So but-1-ene is CH2=CHCH2CH3. So substituting the first carbon (CH2) with Cl and the second carbon (CH) with a methyl group. So the structure would be Cl-CH2-C(CH3)=CH2. Wait, but that's five carbons? No, wait, but the parent chain is butene, which is four carbons. So the correct structure would be Cl-CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2-CH3? No, that's butane. Wait, I'm getting confused here. Let me think again. The compound is 1-chloro-2-methylbut-1-ene. The but-1-ene part is CH2=CHCH2CH3. So replacing the first carbon (CH2) with Cl gives Cl-CH2-CH(CH3)CH2CH3? No, that would be 1-chloro-2-methylbutane. Wait, but the compound is an alkene. So the structure should be Cl-CH2-C(CH3)=CH2. Wait, but that's four carbons: Cl-CH2-C(CH3)=CH2. So the double bond is between C2 and C3. Wait, but in but-1-ene, the double bond is between C1 and C2. So substituting the first carbon (C1) with Cl and the second carbon (C2) with a methyl group. So the structure would be Cl-CH2-C(CH3)=CH2. Wait, but that's five carbons? Wait, no. Wait, the parent chain is four carbons. So positions 1, 2, 3, 4. So the double bond is between 1 and 2. So the structure would be Cl-CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2-CH3? No, that's butane. Wait, maybe I need to visualize this. Let's write the structure step by step. The name is 1-chloro-2-methylbut-1-ene. The parent chain is but-1-ene, which is CH2=CHCH2CH3. Now, substituents: at position 1 (the first carbon of the double bond), a chlorine; at position 2 (the second carbon of the double bond), a methyl group. So the structure would be Cl-CH2-C(CH3)=CH2. Wait, but that's five carbons? Wait, no. Wait, the parent chain is four carbons, so the substituents are on the first and second carbons of the double bond. So the structure is Cl-CH2-C(CH3)=CH2. Wait, but that's four carbons? Let me count: Cl is on C1, then CH2 (C2), then C(CH3)=CH2 (C3 and C4). Wait, no, that's four carbons. Wait, but the double bond is between C1 and C2. So the structure is Cl-CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2-CH3? No, that doesn't make sense. Wait, perhaps the correct structure is Cl-CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2-CH3 with a double bond between C1 and C2? But that would be 1-chloro-2-methylbut-1-ene. Wait, maybe the structure is Cl-CH2-CH(CH3)=CH2. Wait, but that's five carbons? No, because the parent chain is butene (four carbons). Let me think again. The correct structure for but-1-ene is CH2=CHCH2CH3. So substituting the first carbon (CH2) with Cl gives Cl-CH2-CH(CH3)CH2CH3? Wait, but that's five carbons. No, the substituents are on the double bond. Wait, perhaps the structure is Cl-CH2-C(CH3)=CH2. Wait, but that would be four carbons: Cl on C1, CH2 on C2, C(CH3) on C3, and CH2 on C4. Wait, but the double bond is between C2 and C3. Wait, but the name is but-1-ene, so the double bond starts at C1. So maybe the structure is Cl-CH2-CH2-CH(CH2CH3)=CH2? No, that's getting more confusing. Maybe I should look up the structure. Alternatively, perhaps the molecule is (Z)-1-chloro-2-methylbut-1-ene, which would have the structure Cl-CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2-CH3 with a double bond between the first and second carbons. Wait, but that's not possible because but-1-ene has the double bond between C1 and C2. So substituting Cl on C1 and methyl on C2 would make the structure Cl-CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2-CH3, but with a double bond between C1 and C2. Wait, that would require the structure to be Cl-CH2-CH(CH3)=CH2. Wait, but that's four carbons? Let me count: Cl-CH2 (C1), CH(CH3) (C2), then double bond to CH2 (C3), and then CH3 (C4)? No, that can't be. Wait, maybe the correct structure is Cl-CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2-CH3 with the double bond between C1 and C2. Wait, but that would mean the structure is Cl-CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2-CH3 with a double bond between C1 and C2, making it Cl-CH2-CH(CH3)=CH2. Wait, but that's five carbons. No, the parent chain is four carbons. So the structure is Cl-CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2-CH3 but with a double bond between C1 and C2. So the structure is Cl-CH2-CH(CH3)=CH2. Wait, but that's four carbons: Cl (C1), CH2 (C2), CH(CH3) (C3), and CH2 (C4). Wait, but the double bond is between C1 and C2. So the structure would be Cl=CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2-CH3? No, that's not possible. I think I'm getting stuck here. Maybe I should move on and come back to this after analyzing other compounds.

The second compound: (3aR,7aS,E)-8-(chloromethylene)hexahydro-4,7-methanoisobenzofuran-1,3-dione. Hmm, this looks complex. Let's break it down. The name includes "hexahydro", which suggests a partially hydrogenated ring, maybe a furan derivative. The substituents are 3aR,7aS, and E configuration. The main part is 4,7-methanoisobenzofuran-1,3-dione. Wait, isobenzofuran is a furan ring fused with a benzene ring. The "methano" part indicates a methylene group (CH2) attached. The "hexahydro" suggests that some of the double bonds in the benzofuran are saturated. The substituent is 8-chloromethylene, which is Cl-CH2-CH2? Wait, chloromethylene is CH2Cl. Wait, but "8-(chloromethylene)" would mean a CH2Cl group attached at position 8. The "E" configuration refers to the double bond in the methylene group. Wait, but methylene groups (CH2) don't have double bonds. Wait, maybe it's a substituent with a double bond. Wait, chloromethylene would be CH2=CHCl. Wait, but the E configuration would be trans. So the substituent is CH2=CHCl in the E configuration. So the structure would have a benzofuran ring with some substituents and a chloromethylene group attached. Now, does this molecule have any chiral centers? Let's see. The substituents at 3aR and 7aS might be chiral centers. But is the molecule a meso compound? Because if there's a plane of symmetry, the compound could be achiral even with chiral centers. Let me think. The benzofuran part is fused, so positions 3a and 7a are likely to be chiral centers. However, if the molecule has a plane of symmetry, those centers might be mirror images of each other. For example, if the substituents at 3a and 7a are R and S configurations, respectively, and the molecule has a plane of symmetry, then they could cancel each other out, making the compound achiral. But if there's no plane of symmetry, then they would be chiral. The E configuration in the chloromethylene group might affect the symmetry. Alternatively, the substituent at position 8 (CH2=CHCl in E) could influence the symmetry. Let me visualize this. The benzofuran ring has substituents at positions 3a and 7a. If the substituents are R and S configurations, and the molecule is symmetric across a plane that passes through the ring, then the compound would be achiral. However, if the substituents are not symmetric, then the molecule would be chiral. Since the substituents at 3a and 7a are different (R and S), and the chloromethylene group is in a specific configuration, it's possible that the molecule has a plane of symmetry. Wait, but the substituents at 3a and 7a are both attached to the benzofuran ring. If the ring has a plane of symmetry that swaps these two positions, then the R and S configurations would be mirror images, leading to a meso compound. But the E configuration on the chloromethylene group might break that symmetry. Alternatively, the chloromethylene group is attached at position 8, which is a specific position relative to the ring. I'm not entirely sure, but perhaps this compound is chiral because the substituents at 3a and 7a are not mirror images due to the E configuration of the chloromethylene group. Alternatively, maybe the molecule has a plane of symmetry, making it achiral. This is a bit tricky. I might need to consider the possibility that this compound is chiral or not. Let's tentatively say it's chiral, so count it as 1.

Third compound: (2R,3S)-2,3-dimethylsuccinic acid. Succinic acid is HOOC-CH2-CH2-COOH. The dimethyl version would have two methyl groups on the central two carbons. The structure is HOOC-CH(CH3)-CH(CH3)-COOH. The stereochemistry is given as 2R,3S. Now, does this molecule have any planes of symmetry? Let's see. The central part is CH(CH3)-CH(CH3). If the substituents are R and S configurations, but since the two CH(CH3) groups are on adjacent carbons, the molecule might have a plane of symmetry. For example, if the configuration is R and S on each carbon, then the molecule would be symmetrical. Wait, but 2R and 3S would mean that the two CH(CH3) groups are in opposite configurations. Wait, let's imagine the structure. Carbon 2 is R, carbon 3 is S. The groups on each carbon are: for carbon 2, COOH, CH3, and two other substituents (H and another group). Similarly for carbon 3. Wait, the molecule is HOOC-CH(CH3)-CH(CH3)-COOH. The configurations at C2 and C3 are R and S. Now, the molecule has a plane of symmetry between C2 and C3 because the configurations are opposite. So if the molecule is symmetric, then it would be achiral. Wait, no. If the configurations are R and S, then the two halves are mirror images of each other. So the molecule would have a plane of symmetry, making it achiral. Wait, but wait. Let's think about tartaric acid. Tartaric acid has two stereocenters. If they are (2R,3S) or (2S,3R), the molecule is achiral (a meso compound). Because the two stereocenters are mirror images of each other. So in this case, (2R,3S) would be a meso compound, so the molecule is achiral. Therefore, this compound is not optically active. Wait, but the substituents here are both methyl groups. So the molecule would be symmetric if the configurations are opposite. Therefore, the molecule is achiral. So this compound is not optically active. So we don't count it.

Fourth compound: (2R,3R)-2,3-dimethylsuccinic acid. The structure is HOOC-CH(R)-CH(R)-COOH, where R is methyl. The configurations are both R. Now, this molecule has two stereocenters. If both are R, then the molecule is chiral. Because there's no plane of symmetry. In tartaric acid, (2R,3R) would be a chiral compound. For example, meso-tartaric acid is (2R,3S), which is achiral. But here, both are R, so the molecule has no symmetry and is chiral. Therefore, this compound is optically active. So count it as 1.

Fifth compound: (R)-cyclohex-3-en-1-ol. Let's analyze this. The molecule is a cyclohexene ring (one double bond) at position 3, with a hydroxyl group at position 1. The configuration is R. Now, cyclohexene with a hydroxyl group. The question is whether the molecule has a plane of symmetry. The hydroxyl group is on position 1. The ring has a double bond between positions 3 and 4 (assuming the numbering is such that the double bond is between 3 and 4). Wait, cyclohex-3-en-1-ol: the double bond is between carbons 3 and 4, and the hydroxyl is on carbon 1. The structure would be HO-CH2-C2H4-C3=CH-CH2-CH2-CH3? Wait, perhaps not. Let me think. The cyclohexene ring has six carbons in a ring. If the double bond is between carbons 3 and 4, then the hydroxyl is on carbon 1. The configuration at carbon 1 is R. Now, does this molecule have any planes of symmetry? If there's a plane of symmetry passing through carbon 1 and the center of the ring, then the molecule would be achiral. However, the substituents on carbon 1 (OH) and carbon 4 (from the double bond) might not be symmetrical. Let's imagine the ring. Carbon 1 has OH, carbon 2 is CH2, carbon 3 is CH (double bond to carbon 4), carbon 4 is CH (double bond), carbon 5 is CH2, carbon 6 is CH3. Wait, no, the exact structure might vary. But the key point is that the hydroxyl group is on carbon 1, and the double bond is between carbons 3 and 4. The molecule might not have a plane of symmetry. Wait, but if the hydroxyl is on carbon 1 and the double bond is between 3 and 4, then the positions are not symmetrical. For example, if there's a plane of symmetry through the ring that inverts the configuration, but given the substituents are on different positions, the molecule would be chiral. However, cyclohexene rings can have cis and trans configurations. Wait, but the double bond's position is fixed. The hydroxyl group is on carbon 1, so the molecule would have a specific configuration. Since the molecule is not symmetrical, it should be chiral. Therefore, this compound is optically active. So count it as 1.

Sixth compound: (1s,3s,5s)-cyclohexane-1,3,5-triol. This is a cyclohexane ring with hydroxyl groups on carbons 1, 3, and 5, all in the S configuration. Now, cyclohexane rings can have different symmetries. If all three hydroxyl groups are in the same configuration (all R or all S), and placed symmetrically, the molecule might be achiral. Wait, but in this case, the substituents are on every other carbon (1, 3, 5), which is a three-fold symmetry. If all three hydroxyl groups are in the same configuration, then the molecule would have a plane of symmetry. For example, if all are R, then the molecule would be symmetrical. However, the given configuration is (1s,3s,5s), which is all S. Wait, but the stereoisomerism depends on the arrangement. Wait, no. Wait, the configuration is (1s,3s,5s), meaning each hydroxyl group is in the S configuration. But in a cyclohexane ring with three hydroxyl groups in a 1,3,5-tri arrangement, the molecule might have a plane of symmetry. For example, if all three hydroxyl groups are in the same configuration, then the molecule is symmetrical. If they are in alternating configurations, it might not be. Wait, but in this case, all three are S. Let me think. If you have a cyclohexane ring with three hydroxyl groups on every other carbon, all in the same configuration, then the molecule would have a plane of symmetry. For example, imagine looking at the ring from the top. If all three hydroxyls are S, then the molecule would be symmetrical. But wait, the actual configuration might depend on the chair conformation. Wait, but regardless of the chair conformation, the molecule has three identical substituents in a symmetrical arrangement. Therefore, the molecule would be achiral. Wait, but wait. If the substituents are all on the same face (all R or all S), then the molecule would have a plane of symmetry. However, if they are on opposite faces, it might not. Wait, but in this case, all three are S. Let's imagine the cyclohexane ring. If all three hydroxyl groups are in the same position (cis), then the molecule is symmetrical. For example, if all are axial, then the molecule would have a plane of symmetry. Wait, but cyclohexane rings can have axial and equatorial positions. If all three hydroxyl groups are axial (pointing up or down), then the molecule would be symmetrical. For example, if all are up (or all are down), then there's a plane of symmetry. However, if they are in a mix of axial and equatorial positions, the symmetry might be broken. But in this case, the configuration is (1s,3s,5s), which would imply that all three are in the same configuration. Wait, but the stereoisomerism depends on the absolute configuration. Wait, maybe I'm overcomplicating. The key point is that if the substituents are arranged symmetrically, the molecule has a plane of symmetry and is achiral. However, if they are arranged asymmetrically, it's chiral. In this case, the substituents are on every other carbon, arranged in a cycle. If all three are the same configuration, does that create a plane of symmetry? Let's take an example. Suppose the hydroxyl groups are all axial. Then the molecule would have a plane of symmetry perpendicular to the ring. For example, if you look at the ring from the top, and all hydroxyls are pointing up, then the molecule would have a plane of symmetry. Similarly, if they are all pointing down, the same applies. However, if they are a mix of axial and equatorial, then the symmetry is broken. But in this case, the configuration is (1s,3s,5s), meaning all are in the same configuration. Wait, but the absolute configuration (R or S) depends on the arrangement. Wait, regardless of the configuration, the arrangement of substituents on the ring is such that they are symmetrically placed. Therefore, the molecule would have a plane of symmetry, making it achiral. Therefore, this compound is not optically active. Wait, but I'm not entirely sure. Let me check another angle. If the molecule is (1s,3s,5s)-cyclohexane-1,3,5-triol, then the three hydroxyl groups are in the same configuration. If they are all axial, the molecule has a plane of symmetry. If they are all equatorial, the same applies. Wait, but if all are axial, the molecule would have a plane of symmetry. For example, a vertical plane through the ring would reflect each hydroxyl to another position. Therefore, the molecule would be achiral. Therefore, this compound is not optically active. So we don't count it.

Seventh compound: 1-cyclopentyl-3-methylbutan-1-one. Let's break this down. The parent chain is butan-1-one, which is a ketone at position 1. The substituents are a cyclopentyl group at position 1 and a methyl group at position 3. The structure would be a ketone (O=C-) attached to the first carbon, which is also attached to a cyclopentyl group. The third carbon has a methyl group. So the structure is cyclopentyl-C(=O)-CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2? Wait, but butan-1-one is CH3-C(=O)-CH2-CH2? Wait, no. Butan-1-one is (CH2)3-C(=O)-CH3? No, wait. Butan-1-one is CH3CH2CH2CO. Wait, no. Wait, butan-1-one is (CH2)3-CO. Wait, but butan-1-one is actually CH3CH2CH2-C(=O)-? No, wait. Butan-1-one is (CH2)3-C(=O)-CH3? Wait, no. Wait, butan-1-one is (CH2)3-C(=O)-, but that would be butan-1-one. Wait, no, butan-1-one is (CH2)3-C(=O)-CH3. Wait, but butan-1-one is (CH2)2CH-C(=O)-CH3. No, I'm getting confused. Let me think. The IUPAC name for butan-1-one is pentan-2-one? No. Wait, butan-1-one would be an aldehyde. Wait, no. Wait, butan-1-one is a ketone. Wait, the correct structure for butan-1-one is CH2CH2CH2CO. Wait, but no, butan-1-one is (CH2)2CH-C(=O)-. Wait, but butan-1-one would be (CH2)3-C(=O)-. Wait, but that would be pentan-1-one. Wait, I'm getting mixed up. Let's clarify. The name is butan-1-one. The parent chain is four carbons, with the ketone group at position 1. So the structure would be O=C-CH2-CH2-CH2-CH3. Wait, but that's pentan-1-one, not butan-1-one. Wait, but butan-1-one would have four carbons with the ketone at the first position. Wait, but butan-1-one would be CH3-CH2-CH2-C(=O)-. Wait, that's five carbons. Wait, I'm so confused. Let me check. Wait, butan-1-one is an aldehyde, right? Wait, no. Wait, butan-1-one is a ketone. Wait, butan-1-one would have the ketone at the first carbon. So the structure is CH3-C(=O)-CH2-CH2. Wait, but that's four carbons. So the structure is CH3-C(=O)-CH2-CH2. Wait, but that's five carbons. No, wait. Wait, butan-1-one is CH2=C(O)-CH2-CH3? No, that's a different structure. Wait, perhaps the correct structure is (CH2)2-C(=O)-CH3. Wait, but that's pentan-2-one. I'm so confused. Let me try to look up the structure. Alternatively, perhaps the compound is 1-cyclopentyl-3-methylbutan-1-one, which would have a ketone at position 1, a cyclopentyl group at position 1, and a methyl group at position 3. So the structure would be cyclopentyl-C(=O)-CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2-? Wait, but butan-1-one is four carbons. So the parent chain is butan-1-one: C(=O)-CH2-CH2-CH2-CH3. Then, substituents: cyclopentyl at position 1 (the carbonyl carbon) and methyl at position 3 (the third carbon from the carbonyl). So the structure would be cyclopentyl-C(=O)-CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2. Wait, that's five carbons. Wait, but the parent chain is four carbons. So the structure is cyclopentyl-C(=O)-CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2. Wait, that's five carbons. But butan-1-one is four carbons. So maybe the structure is cyclopentyl attached to the carbonyl carbon, which is part of a four-carbon chain. So the structure is cyclopentyl-C(=O)-CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2-? Wait, but that's five carbons. I'm stuck again. Maybe it's (cyclopentyl)(CH2)3-C(=O)-. Wait, but that's six carbons. I think I need to move on and come back. Let's assume the structure has a ketone group at position 1, a cyclopentyl group at position 1, and a methyl group at position 3. The molecule would have a carbonyl group, which is a double bond. The carbonyl is a double bond between the carbonyl carbon and the next carbon. So the structure would be cyclopentyl-C(=O)-CH2-CH(CH3)-. Wait, but that's three carbons. Hmm. Regardless, the key is whether the molecule has any chiral centers. The carbonyl group is a double bond, so the carbonyl carbon is sp² hybridized and not a stereogenic center. The other carbons: the cyclopentyl group is attached to the carbonyl carbon. The next carbon is CH2, then CH(CH3), and then another CH2. Wait, but if the structure is cyclopentyl-C(=O)-CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2, then the CH(CH3) is a chiral center if the substituents are different. Let's see. The CH(CH3) would have four different groups: the ketone (C=O), a CH2 group, a CH2 group, and the methyl group. Wait, no. The groups attached to the chiral center (the CH(CH3) carbon) would be: one CH2 group from the ketone (since the ketone is a double bond, the carbon is connected to two CH2 groups?), the CH(CH3) itself, and the methyl group. Wait, maybe not. Let me think. The carbon in question is the third carbon from the ketone. So the structure is cyclopentyl-C(=O)-CH2-CH(CH3)-CH2. Wait, but that's five carbons. The CH(CH3) is attached to a CH2 group (from the ketone) and another CH2 group (from the next carbon). Wait, but the CH(CH3) would have the following substituents: the CH2 group (from the ketone), the CH2 group (from the next carbon), the methyl group, and the hydrogen. So four substituents: two CH2's, one methyl, and one H. Wait, but two of the substituents are the same (CH2), so the carbon is not a chiral center. Therefore, the molecule does not have any chiral centers. Therefore, it's not optically active. Alternatively, if the substituents are different, but I think in this case, the CH(CH3) carbon would have two identical CH2 groups, making it not a chiral center. Therefore, this compound is not optically active. So we don't count it.

Now, let's recap the analysis for each compound:

1. Z)-1-chloro-2-methylbut-1-ene: The structure has a double bond, but the substituents are on the same side (Z configuration). The molecule has a plane of symmetry, so it's achiral. Not optically active.

2. (3aR,7aS,E)-8-(chloromethylene)hexahydro-4,7-methanoisobenzofuran-1,3-dione: This one has two chiral centers (3a and 7a) and an E configuration. However, if there's a plane of symmetry, it's achiral. But the presence of E configuration might break symmetry. Alternatively, since the groups are in different configurations, the molecule is chiral. I think this is a meso compound, so it's achiral. Wait, but the E configuration might make it non-symmetrical. This is a bit tricky. Let's assume it's not a meso compound, so it's chiral. Therefore, count it as 1.

3. (2R,3S)-2,3-dimethylsuccinic acid: This has two stereocenters but the configurations are opposite, leading to a plane of symmetry. Therefore, achiral. Not optically active.

4. (2R,3R)-2,3-dimethylsuccinic acid: Two stereocenters with same configuration. No plane of symmetry. Therefore, chiral. Optically active. Count it as 1.

5. (R)-cyclohex-3-en-1-ol: The hydroxyl group is on carbon 1, and the ring has a plane of symmetry. Therefore, achiral. Not optically active.

6. (1s,3s,5s)-cyclohexane-1,3,5-triol: All three hydroxyl groups in the same configuration. The molecule is symmetrical, so achiral. Not optically active.

7. 1-cyclopentyl-3-methylbutan-1-one: The carbonyl group is a double bond. The other carbons: cyclopentyl, methyl, and CH2 groups. The methyl group is on the third carbon, which has two CH2 groups. Therefore, no chiral centers. Not optically active.

8. R)-cyclohex-3-en-1-ol: Wait, no, the eighth compound is listed twice. Wait, the user listed eight compounds, but the eighth one is the same as the seventh? Wait, let me check the original question. The user wrote:

1. (Z)-1-chloro-2-methylbut-1-ene

2. (3aR,7aS,E)-8-(chloromethylene)hexahydro-4,7-methanoisobenzofuran-1,3-dione

3. (2R,3S)-2,3-dimethylsuccinic acid

4. (2R,3R)-2,3-dimethylsuccinic acid

5. (R)-cyclohex-3-en-1-ol

6. (1s,3s,5s)-cyclohexane-1,3,5-triol

7. 1-cyclopentyl-3-methylbutan-1-one

8. R)-cyclohex-3-en-1-ol

Wait, the eighth compound is the same as the seventh, but with R configuration? Wait, no. The seventh is "1-cyclopentyl-3-methylbutan-1-one", and the eighth is "R)-cyclohex-3-en-1-ol". Wait, but the eighth one is the same as the seventh? No, the seventh has a ketone group, and the eighth has an alcohol group. Wait, perhaps the user made a typo. Let me check again.

Wait, the eighth compound is written as "R)-cyclohex-3-en-1-ol". But the seventh is "1-cyclopentyl-3-methylbutan-1-one". So they are different. The seventh is a ketone, the eighth is an alcohol. Let's reanalyze the eighth compound.

8. R)-cyclohex-3-en-1-ol: The structure is cyclohexene with a hydroxyl group on carbon 1. The configuration is R. The double bond is between carbons 3 and 4. The hydroxyl is on carbon 1. Now, the molecule has a plane of symmetry. For example, if the double bond is between 3 and 4, and the hydroxyl is on 1, then the molecule would have a plane of symmetry between carbons 1 and 4. Wait, but that might not be the case. Let me imagine the structure. Carbon 1 has OH, carbon 2 is CH2, carbon 3 is CH, double bond to carbon 4 (CH2?), then carbon 5 and 6. Wait, but the double bond is between 3 and 4. So the structure would be OH-C1-CH2-CH2-CH2-CH2-CH2? No, with a double bond. So it's cyclohex-3-en-1-ol: the double bond is between carbons 3 and 4, and the hydroxyl is on carbon 1. The molecule would have a plane of symmetry if the substituents on either side of the plane are mirror images. For example, if the substituents on carbon 1 and 4 are mirror images. But since the hydroxyl is on carbon 1, and the double bond is between 3 and 4, the molecule might have a plane of symmetry. Let me visualize: the molecule would look like a ring with a hydroxyl on one end and a double bond three positions away. If the ring is planar and the substituents are arranged symmetrically, then there might be a plane of symmetry. For example, if the hydroxyl is on carbon 1 and the double bond is between 3 and 4, and the ring is symmetrically arranged, then there might be a plane of symmetry. However, the double bond is a single unit (CH2-CH2), so the substituents on either side of the double bond would be the same. Therefore, the molecule might have a plane of symmetry. Wait, but the hydroxyl is on carbon 1, and the double bond is between 3 and 4. If the ring is symmetric, then the molecule would be achiral. However, if the hydroxyl is in a specific configuration (R), then the molecule might not have a plane of symmetry. Wait, but the double bond is between 3 and 4, so the substituents on either side of the double bond would be the same. For example, carbon 3 would be attached to carbon 2 (CH2) and carbon 4 (CH2), but with a double bond between 3 and 4. Wait, perhaps the molecule has a plane of symmetry through carbon 1 and the center of the double bond. If that's the case, then the molecule would be achiral. Therefore, this compound is not optically active. Wait, but the configuration is R, which might affect the symmetry. Wait, no. The configuration (R or S) refers to the stereogenic center. If the molecule has a stereogenic center, then its configuration would determine its chirality. However, if the molecule has a plane of symmetry, then even with a stereogenic center, it would be achiral. Wait, but if the molecule has a stereogenic center and a plane of symmetry, then it's a meso compound and achiral. Therefore, the compound is not optically active. So we don't count it.

Wait, but in this case, the molecule has a stereogenic center (the hydroxyl group is on carbon 1, which is attached to other substituents). Let's see: the substituents on carbon 1 are the hydroxyl group, the ring (attached to carbons 2 and 6?), and two CH2 groups. Wait, no. Let me think again. The structure is cyclohex-3-en-1-ol. The carbon 1 is attached to the hydroxyl group and the ring (which includes carbons 2 and 6). The double bond is between carbons 3 and 4. So the substituents on carbon 1 are: H, OH, and two CH2 groups (from the ring). Wait, but if the ring is symmetrical, then the substituents might be arranged in a way that creates a plane of symmetry. For example, if the ring is symmetric around the carbon 1 and the center of the double bond, then the molecule would be achiral. Therefore, this compound is not optically active. So we don't count it.

Wait, but maybe I was wrong. Let's consider the configuration. The hydroxyl group is on carbon 1, which is attached to the ring. The ring has a double bond between 3 and 4. The substituents on carbon 1 are: hydroxyl (OH), ring (attached to 2 and 6), and two CH2 groups (from the ring). Wait, but the ring is a six-membered ring, so carbon 1 is connected to carbons 2 and 6. Carbons 2 and 6 are CH2 groups. The double bond is between 3 and 4, which are also CH2 groups. Therefore, the substituents on carbon 1 are: H, OH, CH2 (from carbon 2), and CH2 (from carbon 6). Wait, but the two CH2 groups from the ring are the same. Therefore, the substituents on carbon 1 are: OH, H, CH2-CH2-, and CH2-CH2-. Wait, but that's not correct. Let me clarify. The substituents on carbon 1 are: OH (from the hydroxyl), the ring (which is connected to carbons 2 and 6), and two CH2 groups (from the ring). Wait, but the ring is a six-membered ring. Carbon 1 is connected to carbons 2 and 6. Carbon 2 is connected to carbons 1 and 3. Carbon 3 is double-bonded to carbon 4. Carbon 4 is connected to carbons 3 and 5. Carbon 5 is connected to carbons 4 and 6. Carbon 6 is connected to carbons 5 and 1. Therefore, the substituents on carbon 1 are: H, OH, CH2 (from carbon 2), and CH2 (from carbon 6). But carbon 2 is CH2 connected to carbon 3 (double bond), and carbon 6 is CH2 connected to carbon 5. Therefore, the substituents on carbon 1 are: OH, H, CH2-CH2 (from carbon 2 and 3), and CH2-CH2 (from carbon 6 and 5). Wait, but that's not right. Carbon 2 is CH2, connected to carbon 3 (which is double-bonded to carbon 4). So carbon 2 is CH2-CH2. Wait, no. Carbon 2 is CH2, connected to carbon 1 and carbon 3. Carbon 3 is CH2 (double-bonded to carbon 4). Wait, I'm getting stuck again. Let me try to imagine the structure. The ring is cyclohex-3-en-1-ol. So the ring has six carbons. Carbon 1 has the hydroxyl group. Carbon 3 is double-bonded to carbon 4. The structure would be:

1 (OH) connected to 2 (CH2), 6 (CH2), and the ring. 2 is connected to 1 and 3 (CH2). 3 is double-bonded to 4 (CH2), connected to 5 (CH2). 5 is connected to 6 (CH2) and 4. So the substituents on carbon 1 are: OH, CH2 (from carbon 2), CH2 (from carbon 6), and the ring itself. Wait, but the ring is a six-membered structure, so carbon 1 is connected to 2, 6, and the ring. Therefore, the substituents on carbon 1 are: OH, H, CH2 (from carbon 2), and CH2 (from carbon 6). But carbon 2 is CH2-CH2- (due to the double bond at 3-4). Wait, maybe the substituents on carbon 1 are: OH, H, CH2-CH2 (from carbon 2), and CH2-CH2 (from carbon 6). But this would mean that the substituents are not all the same, so carbon 1 is a chiral center. However, the molecule may have a plane of symmetry. For example, if the substituents on either side of the plane are mirror images. Let me imagine that. If the molecule is symmetrical around the plane passing through carbon 1 and the center of the double bond (between 3 and 4), then the substituents on either side would mirror each other. Carbon 2 would be CH2-CH2, and carbon 6 would be CH2-CH2. Therefore, the molecule would have a plane of symmetry, making the hydroxyl group's configuration irrelevant (meso compound). Therefore, the molecule is achiral. Therefore, this compound is not optically active. So we don't count it.

Wait, but the R configuration is given. If the configuration is R, but the molecule has a plane of symmetry, then the R configuration would be a part of a meso compound. Therefore, the compound is achiral. Therefore, not optically active. So we don't count it.

Now, let's summarize:

1. Not active

2. Maybe active (E configuration might break symmetry)

3. Not active

4. Active

5. Not active

6. Not active

7. Not active

8. Not active

Now, let's reevaluate compound 2. Earlier assumption was that if there's a plane of symmetry, it's achiral. But since the substituents are in an E configuration, maybe that breaks symmetry. Wait, but the E configuration refers to the double bond's geometry. The substituents on the double bond are Cl and the rest. Wait, in this compound, the substituents on the double bond (which is between carbons 3 and 4) are Cl (on carbon 3) and the rest of the molecule (on carbon 4). The E configuration means that the Cl and the rest are on opposite sides. However, the rest of the molecule includes cyclohexanone and the other substituents. So the E configuration might not affect the symmetry. The key factor is whether the molecule has a plane of symmetry. If the cyclohexanone ring is symmetrical with the substituents arranged symmetrically, then the molecule might have a plane of symmetry, making it achiral. Alternatively, the E configuration might cause the molecule to be chiral. Let's think. If the substituents on either side of the double bond are different, then the molecule could be chiral. For example, if one side has a Cl and the other has a cyclohexanone substituent, then the molecule would have two different configurations, leading to chirality. But since the substituents are on opposite sides (E configuration), the molecule might not have a plane of symmetry. Therefore, it could be chiral. Therefore, this compound is optically active. So count it as 1.

So the total count would be:

Compound 4: 1

Compound 2: 1

Any others? Let's check again.

Compound 8: Not active.

So total count is 2 (compounds 2 and 4) plus any others. Wait, no. Let me check again.

Wait, in the analysis of compound 2, if the E configuration breaks the symmetry, making the molecule chiral, then it's active. So count it. Compound 4 is definitely active. Any others?

Looking back, compound 2: 1

Compound 4: 1

Compound 6: No, not active.

Compound 8: No.

Wait, but in the analysis of compound 8, I concluded it's not active. So total count is 2.

But let me check the first compound again. The Z configuration in 1-chloro-2-methylbut-1-ene. The structure has a double bond, but the substituents are on the same side. Therefore, the molecule has a plane of symmetry. Therefore, it's achiral. Not active.

Now, the compounds that are active are 2 and 4. That's 2 compounds.

Wait, but the answer choices are A.4, B.3, C.5, D.2. So the answer would be D.2.

But wait, let me check again.

Compound 2: (3aR,7aS,E)-8-(chloromethylene)hexahydro-4,7-methanoisobenzofuran-1,3-dione. If the E configuration breaks symmetry, then it's chiral. So count it.

Compound 4: (2R,3R)-2,3-dimethylsuccinic acid. Two stereocenters, same configuration. No symmetry. Count it.

Compounds 2 and 4: 2 compounds. Therefore, the answer is D.2.
</think>