Cargando…

Comparison of Many-Particle Representations for Selected Configuration Interaction: II. Numerical Benchmark Calculations

[Image: see text] The present work is the second part in our three-part series on the comparison of many-particle representations for the selected configuration interaction (CI) method. In this work, we present benchmark calculations based on our selected CI program called the iterative configuratio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chilkuri, Vijay Gopal, Neese, Frank
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Chemical Society 2021
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8279407/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33886300
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00081
_version_ 1783722449973542912
author Chilkuri, Vijay Gopal
Neese, Frank
author_facet Chilkuri, Vijay Gopal
Neese, Frank
author_sort Chilkuri, Vijay Gopal
collection PubMed
description [Image: see text] The present work is the second part in our three-part series on the comparison of many-particle representations for the selected configuration interaction (CI) method. In this work, we present benchmark calculations based on our selected CI program called the iterative configuration expansion (ICE) that is inspired by the CIPSI method of Malrieu and co-workers ( MalrieuJ. Chem. Phys.1973, 58, ( (12), ), 5745−5759). We describe the main parameters that enter in this algorithm and perform benchmark calculations on a set of 21 small molecules and compare ground state energies with full configuration interaction (FCI) results (FCI21 test set). The focus is the comparison of the performance of three different types of many-particle basis functions (MPBFs): (1) individual Slater determinants (DETS), (2) individual spin-adapted configuration state functions (CSFs), and (3) all CSFs of a given total spin that can be generated from spatial configurations (CFGs). An analysis of the cost of the calculation in terms of the number of wavefunction parameters and the energy error is evaluated for the DET-, CFG-, and CSF-based ICE. The main differences for the three many-particle basis representations show up in the number of wavefunction parameters and the rate of convergence toward the FCI limit with the thresholds of the ICE. Next, we analyze the best way to extrapolate the ICE energies toward the FCI results as a function of the thresholds. The efficiency of the extrapolation is investigated relative to the FCI21 test set as well as near FCI calculations on three moderately sized hydrocarbon molecules CH(4), C(2)H(4), and C(4)H(6). Finally, we comment on the size-inconsistency error for the three many-particle representations and compare it with the error in the total energy. The implication for selected CI implementations with any of the three many-particle representations is discussed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8279407
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher American Chemical Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82794072021-07-15 Comparison of Many-Particle Representations for Selected Configuration Interaction: II. Numerical Benchmark Calculations Chilkuri, Vijay Gopal Neese, Frank J Chem Theory Comput [Image: see text] The present work is the second part in our three-part series on the comparison of many-particle representations for the selected configuration interaction (CI) method. In this work, we present benchmark calculations based on our selected CI program called the iterative configuration expansion (ICE) that is inspired by the CIPSI method of Malrieu and co-workers ( MalrieuJ. Chem. Phys.1973, 58, ( (12), ), 5745−5759). We describe the main parameters that enter in this algorithm and perform benchmark calculations on a set of 21 small molecules and compare ground state energies with full configuration interaction (FCI) results (FCI21 test set). The focus is the comparison of the performance of three different types of many-particle basis functions (MPBFs): (1) individual Slater determinants (DETS), (2) individual spin-adapted configuration state functions (CSFs), and (3) all CSFs of a given total spin that can be generated from spatial configurations (CFGs). An analysis of the cost of the calculation in terms of the number of wavefunction parameters and the energy error is evaluated for the DET-, CFG-, and CSF-based ICE. The main differences for the three many-particle basis representations show up in the number of wavefunction parameters and the rate of convergence toward the FCI limit with the thresholds of the ICE. Next, we analyze the best way to extrapolate the ICE energies toward the FCI results as a function of the thresholds. The efficiency of the extrapolation is investigated relative to the FCI21 test set as well as near FCI calculations on three moderately sized hydrocarbon molecules CH(4), C(2)H(4), and C(4)H(6). Finally, we comment on the size-inconsistency error for the three many-particle representations and compare it with the error in the total energy. The implication for selected CI implementations with any of the three many-particle representations is discussed. American Chemical Society 2021-04-22 2021-05-11 /pmc/articles/PMC8279407/ /pubmed/33886300 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00081 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society 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 Chilkuri, Vijay Gopal
Neese, Frank
Comparison of Many-Particle Representations for Selected Configuration Interaction: II. Numerical Benchmark Calculations
title Comparison of Many-Particle Representations for Selected Configuration Interaction: II. Numerical Benchmark Calculations
title_full Comparison of Many-Particle Representations for Selected Configuration Interaction: II. Numerical Benchmark Calculations
title_fullStr Comparison of Many-Particle Representations for Selected Configuration Interaction: II. Numerical Benchmark Calculations
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Many-Particle Representations for Selected Configuration Interaction: II. Numerical Benchmark Calculations
title_short Comparison of Many-Particle Representations for Selected Configuration Interaction: II. Numerical Benchmark Calculations
title_sort comparison of many-particle representations for selected configuration interaction: ii. numerical benchmark calculations
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8279407/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33886300
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00081
work_keys_str_mv AT chilkurivijaygopal comparisonofmanyparticlerepresentationsforselectedconfigurationinteractioniinumericalbenchmarkcalculations
AT neesefrank comparisonofmanyparticlerepresentationsforselectedconfigurationinteractioniinumericalbenchmarkcalculations