Basis functions numerical orbitals

However, doubly ionized oxygen, O2-, in Cu oxides, emits an electron in a vacuum, but is to be stabilized in an ionic crystal, and the author found that delocalization of electrons on the oxygen site causes the antiferromagnetic moment on the metal site. The analysis was performed by changing width and depth (including zero depth) of a well potential added to the potential for electrons of oxygen atom in deriving numerical trial basis functions (atomic orbitals). (The well potential was not added to copper atom.) The radial part of trial basis function was numerically calculated as described in the previous... 

Several functional forms have been investigated for the basis functions Given the vast experience of using Gaussian functions in Hartree-Fock theory it will come as no surprise to learn that such functions have also been employed in density functional theory. However, these are not the only possibility Slater type orbitals are also used, as are numerical... 

Exact solutions to the electronic Schrodinger equation are not possible for many-electron atoms, but atomic HF calculations have been done both numerically and within the LCAO model. In approximate work, and for molecular applications, it is desirable to use basis functions that are simple in form. A polyelectron atom is quite different from a one-electron atom because of the phenomenon of shielding", for a particular electron, the other electrons partially screen the effect of the positively charged nucleus. Both Zener (1930) and Slater (1930) used very simple hydrogen-like orbitals of the form... 

If we now consider the numerical results quoted in Table 1 for the optimum exponents, three conclusions follow immediately. Firstly, the 1 s orbital on the heavy atom is unchanged by molecule formation this is to be expected. Second, the sp3 orbitals involved in the X—H bond are all contracted with respect to their free-atom values. Finally, the sp3 orbitals containing Tone pairs of electrons are largely unchanged or expanded slightly on molecule formation. In fact, of course, the optimum separate atoms minimal basis functions do not have the same orbital exponent for the 2 s and 2 p AOs. To facilitate comparisons therefore in Table 1 the optimum n = 2 exponent is given for the atoms when such a constraint is imposed (the qualitative conclusions are, in any event, unchanged by use of these exponents for comparison or a notional exponent of 1/4 (fs + 3 fp) or any reasonable choice). 

Since the exact solution of the Hartree-Fock equation for molecules also proved to be impossible, numerical methods approximating the solution of the Schrodinger s equation at the HF limit have been developed. For example, in the Roothan-Hall SCF method, each SCF orbital is expressed in terms of a linear combination of fixed orbitals or basis sets ((Pi). These orbitals are fixed in the sense that they are not allowed to vary as the SCF calculation proceeds. From n basis functions, new SCF orbitals are generated by... 

These results can be summarized as follows. From the comparison of the contributions for the s orbitals of the monomers to the dimer (SM) and to the CP-system, respectively, it is clear that the contributions in the latter systems are much closer to each other, than to those of monomers. This affirms (by numerical values) our earlier suggested conclusion [3,4], that the use of SMO s implies the advantages of using the CP-recipe, namely its benefit effect . The similar effects of the SMO- and CP recipes are thus pointed out numerically for s orbitals in homonuclear systems at the Hartree-Fock level. The same does not hold, however, for basis functions of p (in our cases p J type. 

This representation permits analytic calculations, as opposed to fiiUy numerical solutions [47,48] of the Hartree-Fock equation. Variational SCF methods using finite expansions [Eq. (2.14)] yield optimal analytic Hartree-Fock-Roothaan orbitals, and their corresponding eigenvalues, within the subspace spanned by the finite set of basis functions. 

Variational one-center restoration. In the variational technique of one-center restoration (VOCR) [79, 80], the proper behavior of the four-component molecular spinors in the core regions of heavy atoms can be restored as an expansion in spherical harmonics inside the sphere with a restoration radius, Rvoa, that should not be smaller than the matching radius, Rc, used at the RECP generation. The outer parts of spinors are treated as frozen after the RECP calculation of a considered molecule. This method enables one to combine the advantages of two well-developed approaches, molecular RECP calculation in a gaussian basis set and atomic-type one-center calculation in numerical basis functions, in the most optimal way. This technique is considered theoretically in [80] and some results concerning the efficiency of the one-center reexpansion of orbitals on another atom can be found in [75]. 

Slater-type orbitals were introduced in Section 5.2 (Eq. (5.2)) as the basis functions used in extended Hiickel theory. As noted in that discussion, STOs have a number of attractive features primarily associated with the degree to which they closely resemble hydrogenic atomic orbitals. In ab initio HF theory, however, they suffer from a fairly significant limitation. There is no analytical solution available for the general four-index integral (Eq. (4.56)) when the basis functions are STOs. The requirement that such integrals be solved by numerical methods severely limits their utility in molecular systems of any significant size. 

For the HgH system numerical wavefunctions were obtained for Hg using both relativistic (Desclaux programme87 was used) and non-relativistic hamiltonians. The orbitals were separated into three groups an inner core (Is up to 3d), an outer core (4s—4/), and the valence orbitals (5s—6s, 6p). The latter two sets were then fitted by Slater-type basis functions. This definition of two core regions enabled them to hold the inner set constant ( frozen core ) whilst making corrections to the outer set, at the end of the calculation, to allow some degree of core polarizability. The correction to the outer core was done approximately via first-order perturbation theory, and the authors concluded that in this case core distortion effects were negligible. 

The relaxation of the structure in the KMC-DR method was done using an approach based on the density functional theory and linear combination of atomic orbitals implemented in the Siesta code [97]. The minimum basis set of localized numerical orbitals of Sankey type [98] was used for all atoms except silicon atoms near the interface, for which polarization functions were added to improve the description of the SiOx layer. The core electrons were replaced with norm-conserving Troullier-Martins pseudopotentials [99] (Zr atoms also include 4p electrons in the valence shell). Calculations were done in the local density approximation (LDA) of DFT. The grid in the real space for the calculation of matrix elements has an equivalent cutoff energy of 60 Ry. The standard diagonalization scheme with Pulay mixing was used to get a self-consistent solution. In the framework of the KMC-DR method, it is not necessary to perform an accurate optimization of the structure, since structure relaxation is performed many times. 

Roothaan s Self-Consistent-Field Procedure.—While numerical integration techniques may be used to solve the Hartree-Fock equations in the case of atoms by the iterative method described above, the lower symmetry of the nuclear field present in molecules necessitates the use of an expansion for the determination of the molecular orbitals by a method developed by Roothaan.81 In Roothaan s approach, it is assumed that each molecular orbital may be adequately represented by a linear expansion in terms of some (simpler) set of basis functions xj, i.e. 

---