arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 1807.02045physics.chem-phphysics.comp-ph
收藏

激发态的登山策略:高精度的参考能量和基准

A Mountaineering Strategy to Excited States: Highly-Accurate Reference Energies and Benchmarks

Pierre-François Loos, Anthony Scemama, Aymeric Blondel, Yann Garniron, Michel Caffarel, Denis Jacquemin

摘要:

努力定义非常准确的垂直跃迁能量,我们进行高水平耦合簇(CC)计算(CCSDTQP)和选择的配置相互作用(sCI)计算(高达数百万的决定因素)的18个小化合物。通过系统地增加CC展开的阶数、CI展开中行列式的数目以及单电子基组的大小,我们已经能够达到接近全CI(FCI)质量的跃迁能。这些计算是在CC 3/aug-cc-pVTZ几何结构上进行的,使用了一系列系统地包括扩散函数的越来越大的原子基组。这样,我们定义了一个列表的110个跃迁能的各种字符的状态作为参考,为进一步的计算。基准跃迁能量提供aug-pVTZ水平以及额外的基组校正,以获得接近完整基组极限的结果。这些参考数据被用于基准测试一系列的12个激发态波函数方法,这些方法考虑了双重和三重贡献,即ADC(2)、ADC(3)、CIS(D)、CIS(D $_\infty$)、CC 2、STEOM-CCSD、CCSD、CCSDR(3)、CCSDT-3、CC 3、CCSDT和CCSDTQ。结果表明,CCSDTQ与外推CI值的差异可以忽略不计,平均绝对误差小至$0.01$ eV,而包括迭代三元组的耦合簇方法也非常准确(平均绝对误差为$0.03$ eV)。因此,CCSDT-3和CC 3可用于定义可靠的基准。这一观察结果不适用于ADC(3),ADC(3)对这组小化合物产生了相当大的误差,明显倾向于过度校正其二阶版本ADC(2)。最后,我们讨论了使用基组外推方法的可能性,以便更容易地处理较大的化合物。

英文摘要:

Striving to define very accurate vertical transition energies, we perform both high-level coupled cluster (CC) calculations (up to CCSDTQP) and selected configuration interaction (sCI) calculations (up to several millions of determinants) for 18 small compounds. By systematically increasing the order of the CC expansion, the number of determinants in the CI expansion as well as the size of the one-electron basis set, we have been able to reach near full CI (FCI) quality transition energies. These calculations are carried out on CC3/aug-cc-pVTZ geometries, using a series of increasingly large atomic basis sets systematically including diffuse functions. In this way, we define a list of 110 transition energies for states of various characters to be used as references for further calculations. Benchmark transition energies are provided at the aug-pVTZ level as well as with additional basis set corrections, in order to obtain results close to the complete basis set limit. These reference data are used to benchmark a series of twelve excited-state wave function methods accounting for double and triple contributions, namely ADC(2), ADC(3), CIS(D), CIS(D$_\infty$), CC2, STEOM-CCSD, CCSD, CCSDR(3), CCSDT-3, CC3, CCSDT and CCSDTQ. It turns out that CCSDTQ yields a negligible difference with the extrapolated CI values with a mean absolute error as small as $0.01$ eV, whereas the coupled cluster approaches including iterative triples are also very accurate (mean absolute error of $0.03$ eV). Consequently, CCSDT-3 and CC3 can be used to define reliable benchmarks. This observation does not hold for ADC(3) that delivers quite large errors for this set of small compounds, with a clear tendency to overcorrect its second-order version, ADC(2). Finally, we discuss the possibility to use basis set extrapolation approaches so as to tackle more easily larger compounds.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑