4.7 Review

Electronic structure of organic diradicals: Evaluation of the performance of coupled-cluster methods

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS
卷 129, 期 17, 页码 -

出版社

AIP Publishing
DOI: 10.1063/1.2999560

关键词

coupled cluster calculations; density functional theory; free radicals; isomerism; organic compounds; perturbation theory; SCF calculations; triplet state

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The performance of (i) the reduced multireference (RMR) coupled-cluster (CC) method with singles and doubles (RMR CCSD) that employs a modest-size MR CISD wave function as an external source for the most important (primary) triples and quadruples in order to account for the nondynamic correlation effects in the presence of quasidegeneracy, (ii) the RMR CCSD(T) method that adds a perturbative correction for the remaining (secondary) triples to the RMR CCSD energy, and (iii) the recently developed partially linearized MR CCSD method, which determines primary triples and quadruples using a subset of linear CC equations projected onto the corresponding higher-than-doubly excited configurations, are tested by considering the singlet-triplet splitting for several diradicals, ranging from a prototypical methylene radical to trimethylenemethane, and benzyne and pyridynium cation isomers. Both RHF and multiconfigurational self-consistent field molecular orbitals are employed. The equilibrium geometries for the lowest-lying singlet and triplet states are determined using both the density functional theory (DFT) and various CC approaches, and a comparison with both the experiment and other theoretical results, wherever available, is made. The RMR CCSD(T) results provide the most satisfactory description in all cases. The dependence of the MR diradical character on a spatial separation of radical centers, as well as the artifactual DFT geometry in the case of benzyne and pyridynium meta-isomers, is also pointed out.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据