Cargando…

Are Accelerated and Enhanced Wave Function Methods Accurate to Compute Static Linear and Nonlinear Optical Properties?

[Image: see text] Key components of organic-based electro-optic devices are challenging to design or optimize because they exhibit nonlinear optical responses, which are difficult to model or rationalize. Computational chemistry furnishes the tools to investigate extensive collections of molecules i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Naim, Carmelo, Besalú-Sala, Pau, Zaleśny, Robert, Luis, Josep M., Castet, Frédéric, Matito, Eduard
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Chemical Society 2023
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10061658/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36862983
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.2c01212
_version_ 1785017336826167296
author Naim, Carmelo
Besalú-Sala, Pau
Zaleśny, Robert
Luis, Josep M.
Castet, Frédéric
Matito, Eduard
author_facet Naim, Carmelo
Besalú-Sala, Pau
Zaleśny, Robert
Luis, Josep M.
Castet, Frédéric
Matito, Eduard
author_sort Naim, Carmelo
collection PubMed
description [Image: see text] Key components of organic-based electro-optic devices are challenging to design or optimize because they exhibit nonlinear optical responses, which are difficult to model or rationalize. Computational chemistry furnishes the tools to investigate extensive collections of molecules in the quest for target compounds. Among the electronic structure methods that provide static nonlinear optical properties (SNLOPs), density functional approximations (DFAs) are often preferred because of their low cost/accuracy ratio. However, the accuracy of the SNLOPs critically depends on the amount of exact exchange and electron correlation included in the DFA, precluding the reliable calculation of many molecular systems. In this scenario, wave function methods such as MP2, CCSD, and CCSD(T) constitute a reliable alternative to compute SNLOPs. Unfortunately, the computational cost of these methods significantly restricts the size of molecules to study, a limitation that hampers the identification of molecules with significant nonlinear optical responses. This paper analyzes various flavors and alternatives to MP2, CCSD, and CCSD(T) methods that either drastically reduce the computational cost or improve their performance but were scarcely and unsystematically employed to compute SNLOPs. In particular, we have tested RI-MP2, RIJK-MP2, RIJCOSX-MP2 (with GridX2 and GridX4 setups), LMP2, SCS-MP2, SOS-MP2, DLPNO-MP2, LNO-CCSD, LNO-CCSD(T), DLPNO-CCSD, DLPNO-CCSD(T0), and DLPNO-CCSD(T1). Our results indicate that all these methods can be safely employed to calculate the dipole moment and the polarizability with average relative errors below 5% with respect to CCSD(T). On the other hand, the calculation of higher-order properties represents a challenge for LNO and DLPNO methods, which present severe numerical instabilities in computing the single-point field-dependent energies. RI-MP2, RIJK-MP2, or RIJCOSX-MP2 are cost-effective methods to compute first and second hyperpolarizabilities with a marginal average error with respect to canonical MP2 (up to 5% for β and up to 11% for γ). More accurate hyperpolarizabilities can be obtained with DLPNO-CCSD(T1); however, this method cannot be employed to obtain reliable second hyperpolarizabilities. These results open the way to obtain accurate nonlinear optical properties at a computational cost that can compete with current DFAs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10061658
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher American Chemical Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100616582023-03-31 Are Accelerated and Enhanced Wave Function Methods Accurate to Compute Static Linear and Nonlinear Optical Properties? Naim, Carmelo Besalú-Sala, Pau Zaleśny, Robert Luis, Josep M. Castet, Frédéric Matito, Eduard J Chem Theory Comput [Image: see text] Key components of organic-based electro-optic devices are challenging to design or optimize because they exhibit nonlinear optical responses, which are difficult to model or rationalize. Computational chemistry furnishes the tools to investigate extensive collections of molecules in the quest for target compounds. Among the electronic structure methods that provide static nonlinear optical properties (SNLOPs), density functional approximations (DFAs) are often preferred because of their low cost/accuracy ratio. However, the accuracy of the SNLOPs critically depends on the amount of exact exchange and electron correlation included in the DFA, precluding the reliable calculation of many molecular systems. In this scenario, wave function methods such as MP2, CCSD, and CCSD(T) constitute a reliable alternative to compute SNLOPs. Unfortunately, the computational cost of these methods significantly restricts the size of molecules to study, a limitation that hampers the identification of molecules with significant nonlinear optical responses. This paper analyzes various flavors and alternatives to MP2, CCSD, and CCSD(T) methods that either drastically reduce the computational cost or improve their performance but were scarcely and unsystematically employed to compute SNLOPs. In particular, we have tested RI-MP2, RIJK-MP2, RIJCOSX-MP2 (with GridX2 and GridX4 setups), LMP2, SCS-MP2, SOS-MP2, DLPNO-MP2, LNO-CCSD, LNO-CCSD(T), DLPNO-CCSD, DLPNO-CCSD(T0), and DLPNO-CCSD(T1). Our results indicate that all these methods can be safely employed to calculate the dipole moment and the polarizability with average relative errors below 5% with respect to CCSD(T). On the other hand, the calculation of higher-order properties represents a challenge for LNO and DLPNO methods, which present severe numerical instabilities in computing the single-point field-dependent energies. RI-MP2, RIJK-MP2, or RIJCOSX-MP2 are cost-effective methods to compute first and second hyperpolarizabilities with a marginal average error with respect to canonical MP2 (up to 5% for β and up to 11% for γ). More accurate hyperpolarizabilities can be obtained with DLPNO-CCSD(T1); however, this method cannot be employed to obtain reliable second hyperpolarizabilities. These results open the way to obtain accurate nonlinear optical properties at a computational cost that can compete with current DFAs. American Chemical Society 2023-03-02 /pmc/articles/PMC10061658/ /pubmed/36862983 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.2c01212 Text en © 2023 American Chemical Society https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Permits the broadest form of re-use including for commercial purposes, provided that author attribution and integrity are maintained (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Naim, Carmelo
Besalú-Sala, Pau
Zaleśny, Robert
Luis, Josep M.
Castet, Frédéric
Matito, Eduard
Are Accelerated and Enhanced Wave Function Methods Accurate to Compute Static Linear and Nonlinear Optical Properties?
title Are Accelerated and Enhanced Wave Function Methods Accurate to Compute Static Linear and Nonlinear Optical Properties?
title_full Are Accelerated and Enhanced Wave Function Methods Accurate to Compute Static Linear and Nonlinear Optical Properties?
title_fullStr Are Accelerated and Enhanced Wave Function Methods Accurate to Compute Static Linear and Nonlinear Optical Properties?
title_full_unstemmed Are Accelerated and Enhanced Wave Function Methods Accurate to Compute Static Linear and Nonlinear Optical Properties?
title_short Are Accelerated and Enhanced Wave Function Methods Accurate to Compute Static Linear and Nonlinear Optical Properties?
title_sort are accelerated and enhanced wave function methods accurate to compute static linear and nonlinear optical properties?
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10061658/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36862983
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.2c01212
work_keys_str_mv AT naimcarmelo areacceleratedandenhancedwavefunctionmethodsaccuratetocomputestaticlinearandnonlinearopticalproperties
AT besalusalapau areacceleratedandenhancedwavefunctionmethodsaccuratetocomputestaticlinearandnonlinearopticalproperties
AT zalesnyrobert areacceleratedandenhancedwavefunctionmethodsaccuratetocomputestaticlinearandnonlinearopticalproperties
AT luisjosepm areacceleratedandenhancedwavefunctionmethodsaccuratetocomputestaticlinearandnonlinearopticalproperties
AT castetfrederic areacceleratedandenhancedwavefunctionmethodsaccuratetocomputestaticlinearandnonlinearopticalproperties
AT matitoeduard areacceleratedandenhancedwavefunctionmethodsaccuratetocomputestaticlinearandnonlinearopticalproperties