arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2401.05048physics.chem-phcond-mat.mtrl-scinucl-th
收藏

用于激发态的态特定耦合簇方法

State-Specific Coupled-Cluster Methods for Excited States

Yann Damour, Anthony Scemama, Denis Jacquemin, Fábris Kossoski, Pierre-François Loos

AI总结:

本文基于 QUEST 中 276 个激发态系统基准比较态特定 $Δ$CCSD 与 EOM-CCSD,发现前者擅长双激发态,但在二重态跃迁和闭壳层单激发态上整体精度较低。

摘要:

我们重新审视了 $Δ$CCSD,这是一种态特定的单、双激发耦合簇(CC with single and double excitations,CCSD)方法,通过利用非 Aufbau 行列式来靶向激发态。该方法在处理双激发态时尤其高效,而标准的运动方程 CCSD(equation-of-motion CCSD,EOM-CCSD)形式体系在这一领域存在不足。我们在此的目标是评估 $Δ$CCSD 应用于其他类型激发态时的有效性,并将其一致性和准确性与 EOM-CCSD 进行比较。为此,我们报告了一项使用 $Δ$CCSD 和 EOM-CCSD 方法计算激发能的基准测试,所考察的一组分子激发态能量不仅包括双激发态,还包括二重态–二重态跃迁,以及闭壳层体系的(单重态和三重态)单激发态。在后一种情况下,我们依靠一种极简版本的多参考 CC,即双行列式 CCSD 方法,来计算激发态。我们的数据集由来自 \textsc{quest} 数据库 [Véril 等人,\textit{WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci.} \textbf{2021}, 11, e1517] 的 276 个激发态组成,为得出关于 $Δ$CCSD 准确性的一般性结论提供了重要基础。除双激发态外,我们发现 $Δ$CCSD 的表现不如 EOM-CCSD。对于二重态–二重态跃迁,两种方法的平均绝对误差(mean absolute errors,MAEs)分别为 \SI{0.10}{\eV} 和 \SI{0.07}{\eV},其差异不如闭壳层体系单激发态情形下显著(MAEs 分别为 \SI{0.15}{\eV} 和 \SI{0.08}{\eV})。这种差异在很大程度上归因于后一组中具有多组态特征的激发态数量更多,而这些状态对 $Δ$CCSD 而言更具挑战性。

英文摘要:

We reexamine $Δ$CCSD, a state-specific coupled-cluster (CC) with single and double excitations (CCSD) approach that targets excited states through the utilization of non-Aufbau determinants. This methodology is particularly efficient when dealing with doubly excited states, a domain where the standard equation-of-motion CCSD (EOM-CCSD) formalism falls short. Our goal here is to evaluate the effectiveness of $Δ$CCSD when applied to other types of excited states, comparing its consistency and accuracy with EOM-CCSD. To this end, we report a benchmark on excitation energies computed with the $Δ$CCSD and EOM-CCSD methods, for a set of molecular excited-state energies that encompasses not only doubly excited states but also doublet-doublet transitions and (singlet and triplet) singly-excited states of closed-shell systems. In the latter case, we rely on a minimalist version of multireference CC known as the two-determinant CCSD method to compute the excited states. Our dataset, consisting of 276 excited states stemming from the \textsc{quest} database [Véril \textit{et al.}, \textit{WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci.} \textbf{2021}, 11, e1517], provides a significant base to draw general conclusions concerning the accuracy of $Δ$CCSD. Except for the doubly-excited states, we found that $Δ$CCSD underperforms EOM-CCSD. For doublet-doublet transitions, the difference between the mean absolute errors (MAEs) of the two methodologies (of \SI{0.10}{\eV} and \SI{0.07}{\eV}) is less pronounced than that obtained for singly-excited states of closed-shell systems (MAEs of \SI{0.15}{\eV} and \SI{0.08}{\eV}). This discrepancy is largely attributed to a greater number of excited states in the latter set exhibiting multiconfigurational characters, which are more challenging for $Δ$CCSD.

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。

↑