Cargando…
Benchmarks for Electronically Excited States with CASSCF Methods
[Image: see text] The accuracy of three different complete active space (CAS) self-consistent field (CASSCF) methods is investigated for the electronically excited-state benchmark set of M. Schreiber; et al. J. Chem. Phys.2008, 128, 13411018397056. Comparison of the CASSCF linear response (LR) metho...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
American
Chemical Society
2019
|
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6620717/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31136706 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.9b00325 |
_version_ | 1783434087227195392 |
---|---|
author | Helmich-Paris, Benjamin |
author_facet | Helmich-Paris, Benjamin |
author_sort | Helmich-Paris, Benjamin |
collection | PubMed |
description | [Image: see text] The accuracy of three different complete active space (CAS) self-consistent field (CASSCF) methods is investigated for the electronically excited-state benchmark set of M. Schreiber; et al. J. Chem. Phys.2008, 128, 13411018397056. Comparison of the CASSCF linear response (LR) methods MC-RPA and MC-TDA and the state-averaged (SA) CASSCF method is made for 122 singlet excitation energies and 69 oscillator strengths. Of all CASSCF methods, when considering the complete test set, MC-RPA performs best for both excitation energies and oscillator strengths with a mean absolute error (MAE) of 0.74 eV and 51%, respectively. MC-TDA and SA-CASSCF show a similar accuracy for the excitation energies with a MAE of ∼1 eV with respect to more accurate coupled cluster (CC3) excitation energies. The opposite trend is observed for the subset of n → π* excitation energies for which SA-CASSCF exhibits the least deviations (MAE 0.65 eV). By looking at s-tetrazine in more detail, we conclude that better performance for the n → π* SA-CASSCF excitation energies can be attributed to a fortunate error compensation. For oscillator strengths, SA-CASSCF performs worst for the complete test set (MAE 100%) as well as for the subsets of n → π* (MAE 192%) and π → π* excitations (MAE 84.9%). In general, CASSCF gives the worst performance for excitation energies of all excited-state ab initio methods considered so far due to lacking the major part of dynamic electron correlation, though MC-RPA and TD-DFT (BP86) show similar performance. Among all LR-type methods, LR-CASSCF oscillator strengths are the ones with the least accuracy for the same reason. As state-specific orbital relaxation effects are accounted for in LR-CASSCF, oscillator strengths are significantly more accurate than those of MS-CASPT2. Our findings should encourage further developments of response theory-based multireference methods with higher accuracy and feasibility. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6620717 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | American
Chemical Society |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-66207172019-07-12 Benchmarks for Electronically Excited States with CASSCF Methods Helmich-Paris, Benjamin J Chem Theory Comput [Image: see text] The accuracy of three different complete active space (CAS) self-consistent field (CASSCF) methods is investigated for the electronically excited-state benchmark set of M. Schreiber; et al. J. Chem. Phys.2008, 128, 13411018397056. Comparison of the CASSCF linear response (LR) methods MC-RPA and MC-TDA and the state-averaged (SA) CASSCF method is made for 122 singlet excitation energies and 69 oscillator strengths. Of all CASSCF methods, when considering the complete test set, MC-RPA performs best for both excitation energies and oscillator strengths with a mean absolute error (MAE) of 0.74 eV and 51%, respectively. MC-TDA and SA-CASSCF show a similar accuracy for the excitation energies with a MAE of ∼1 eV with respect to more accurate coupled cluster (CC3) excitation energies. The opposite trend is observed for the subset of n → π* excitation energies for which SA-CASSCF exhibits the least deviations (MAE 0.65 eV). By looking at s-tetrazine in more detail, we conclude that better performance for the n → π* SA-CASSCF excitation energies can be attributed to a fortunate error compensation. For oscillator strengths, SA-CASSCF performs worst for the complete test set (MAE 100%) as well as for the subsets of n → π* (MAE 192%) and π → π* excitations (MAE 84.9%). In general, CASSCF gives the worst performance for excitation energies of all excited-state ab initio methods considered so far due to lacking the major part of dynamic electron correlation, though MC-RPA and TD-DFT (BP86) show similar performance. Among all LR-type methods, LR-CASSCF oscillator strengths are the ones with the least accuracy for the same reason. As state-specific orbital relaxation effects are accounted for in LR-CASSCF, oscillator strengths are significantly more accurate than those of MS-CASPT2. Our findings should encourage further developments of response theory-based multireference methods with higher accuracy and feasibility. American Chemical Society 2019-05-28 2019-07-09 /pmc/articles/PMC6620717/ /pubmed/31136706 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.9b00325 Text en Copyright © 2019 American Chemical Society This is an open access article published under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) License (http://pubs.acs.org/page/policy/authorchoice_ccby_termsofuse.html) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the author and source are cited. |
spellingShingle | Helmich-Paris, Benjamin Benchmarks for Electronically Excited States with CASSCF Methods |
title | Benchmarks for Electronically Excited States with
CASSCF Methods |
title_full | Benchmarks for Electronically Excited States with
CASSCF Methods |
title_fullStr | Benchmarks for Electronically Excited States with
CASSCF Methods |
title_full_unstemmed | Benchmarks for Electronically Excited States with
CASSCF Methods |
title_short | Benchmarks for Electronically Excited States with
CASSCF Methods |
title_sort | benchmarks for electronically excited states with
casscf methods |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6620717/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31136706 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.9b00325 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT helmichparisbenjamin benchmarksforelectronicallyexcitedstateswithcasscfmethods |