2021
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00535
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Time-Dependent Long-Range-Corrected Double-Hybrid Density Functionals with Spin-Component and Spin-Opposite Scaling: A Comprehensive Analysis of Singlet–Singlet and Singlet–Triplet Excitation Energies

Abstract: Following the work on spin-component and spin-opposite scaled (SCS/SOS) global double hybrids for singlet-singlet excitations by Schwabe and Goerigk [J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2017, 13, 4307-4323] and our own works on new long-range corrected (LC) double hybrids for singlet-singlet and singlet-triplet excitations [J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2019, 15, 4735-4744; J. Chem. Phys. 2020, 153, 064106], we present new LC double hybrids with SCS/SOS that demonstrate further improvement over previously published results an… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

5
171
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 73 publications
(177 citation statements)
references
References 137 publications
(431 reference statements)
5
171
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The inter-fragment interaction energy can be written as follows: where means the electronic preparation (or intra-fragment reference) energy and describes how much energy is necessary to bring the fragments into the electronic structure that is optimal for interaction, , and are the inter-fragment electrostatic and exchange contributions, and are the non-dispersive and dispersive parts of the correlation energy at the CCSD level, and is the triples correction term to the inter-fragment interaction energy. The electronically excited states were also computed considering the SCS-PBE-QIDH XC functional ( Casanova-Páez and Goerigk, 2021 ) built as the spin-component scaled version of Adamo’s PBE-based double hybrid ( Brémond et al, 2014 ) optimized for excited states, all of them implemented in the same O rca package. Although the TDDFT method can accurately describe the equilibrium geometries of excited states and their energies, it cannot accurately determine the CI points due to the problem of the wrong dimensionality of the CI between ground and excited states at the TDDFT level ( Levine et al, 2006 ; Huix-Rotllant et al, 2016 ; Huix-Rotllant et al, 2020 ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The inter-fragment interaction energy can be written as follows: where means the electronic preparation (or intra-fragment reference) energy and describes how much energy is necessary to bring the fragments into the electronic structure that is optimal for interaction, , and are the inter-fragment electrostatic and exchange contributions, and are the non-dispersive and dispersive parts of the correlation energy at the CCSD level, and is the triples correction term to the inter-fragment interaction energy. The electronically excited states were also computed considering the SCS-PBE-QIDH XC functional ( Casanova-Páez and Goerigk, 2021 ) built as the spin-component scaled version of Adamo’s PBE-based double hybrid ( Brémond et al, 2014 ) optimized for excited states, all of them implemented in the same O rca package. Although the TDDFT method can accurately describe the equilibrium geometries of excited states and their energies, it cannot accurately determine the CI points due to the problem of the wrong dimensionality of the CI between ground and excited states at the TDDFT level ( Levine et al, 2006 ; Huix-Rotllant et al, 2016 ; Huix-Rotllant et al, 2020 ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…is the triples correction term to the inter-fragment interaction energy. The electronically excited states were also computed considering the SCS-PBE-QIDH XC functional (Casanova-Páez and Goerigk, 2021) built as the spin-component scaled version of Adamo's PBE-based double hybrid (Brémond et al, 2014) optimized for excited states, all of them implemented in the same Orca package. Although the TDDFT method can accurately describe the equilibrium geometries of excited states and their energies, it cannot accurately determine the CI points due to the problem of the wrong dimensionality of the CI between ground and excited states at the TDDFT level (Levine et al, 2006;Huix-Rotllant et al, 2016;Huix-Rotllant et al, 2020).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, it should be pointed out that an effect of ~0.05 eV is rather large in relation to the "chemical accuracy" threshold often sought for calculated excitation energies, [90] which by some researchers is set at 1 kcal mol À 1 � 0.04 eV, [5,11] whereas others prefer 0.1 eV. [106] At the same time, the effect is small compared to the average errors that all density functionals, including accurate double hybrids ones, [90,[107][108][109] show for excitation energies. Thus, the effect is not likely to be the main source of error when such calculations are performed in a static fashion.…”
Section: Comparison Static and Dynamical Calculationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Linear-response time-dependent DFT within the adiabatic approximation [48][49][50] (TD-DFT) has become the method of choice to treat excited-state problems. Recent advances [51][52][53] and detailed benchmark studies [54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64] on singlemolecule cases have shed light on the quality of TD-DFAs for the calculation of excitation energies. As recently summarised for readers unfamiliar with the field, lower rungs on the Jacob's Ladder of DFT 65 should be avoided due to the emergence of artificial ghost states and large red shifts in excitation energies.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…52,58,62,66,76 Time-dependent DHDFAs 77 depend additionally on a nonlocal, perturbative electron-correlation component 78 that compensates for many of the systematic errors of hybrids. 47,51,54,55,57,58,66,79 In fact, our group recently developed RS-DHDFAs 52,53 that belong to some of the currently most robust TD-DFT methods for a variety of different local and long-range valence excitations in organic molecules. 52,53,[62][63][64] A slightly dif- ferent group of RS-DHDFAs have also proven to be very promising when used within the Tamm-Dancoff Approximation 80 (TDA-DFT).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%