1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
A nonempirical scaling correction approach for density functional methods involving substantial amount of Hartree–Fock exchange
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1063/1.4801922
/content/aip/journal/jcp/138/17/10.1063/1.4801922
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jcp/138/17/10.1063/1.4801922

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Deviation of (a) KS kinetic energy and (b) nuclear-electron attraction energy versus from linearity. Here, is the fractional electron number, and = 0 and = 1 correspond to a carbon cation (C) and a neutral carbon atom (C), respectively.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Absolute deviation of ( + ) from linearity for unscaled (original) and scaled HF methods. The = 0 point represents (a) a carbon atom and (b) a water molecule. The green dashed line marks zero deviation as a reference. The HF curve is obtained through SCF calculation, while the scaled HF curve includes the post-SCF energy corrections of Eqs. (11) and (12) for positive and negative , respectively. The inset of (b) shows the calculated ( + ) of a water molecule in unit of hartree.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

(a) Calculated ε versus calculated − for 70 molecules, and (b) ε versus − for 47 molecules of the G2–97 set. The green solid line indicates ε = − in (a) and ε = − in (b). ε and ε of the scaled HF method are calculated by using Eqs. (11) and (12) , and the vertical and are calculated by the ΔSCF method. The mean absolute deviations (MADs) between calculated ε and − are 0.32 and 1.60 eV for scaled and unscaled HF methods; and the MADs between ε and − are 0.38 and 0.90 eV with and without SC, respectively.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

HF calculated versus experimentally measured − for 18 atoms (H–Ar). The calculated ε by using the HF method with and without SC are also depicted. The green solid line indicates perfect agreement with experimental data of −. Taking the experimental − as references, the MADs for the calculated −, , and are 0.86, 0.47, and 1.13 eV, respectively. Whereas taking the calculated − as references, the MADs for the calculated , and are 1.09 and 0.27 eV, respectively.

Tables

Generic image for table
Table I.

The vertical ionization potentials and the HOMO energies of M(hpp). The s are calculated with the ΔSCF approach. All energies are in units of eV.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aip/journal/jcp/138/17/10.1063/1.4801922
2013-05-02
2014-04-23
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: A nonempirical scaling correction approach for density functional methods involving substantial amount of Hartree–Fock exchange
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jcp/138/17/10.1063/1.4801922
10.1063/1.4801922
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM