Comparison with basis sets

Detailed structural calculations have been carried out for this system. This is because the neutral isomer, C2HsO, which is implicated in the thermochemistry of ethanol, is of interest in pollution control, atmospheric chemistry, and combustion. Also, there is new information available from photoionization experiments with which to compare theoretical calculations. For details of these comparisons, see Curtiss et al.73 In the earlier theoretical studies of Nobes et al.,74 calculations were performed at the MP2 and MP3 levels with basis sets of double plus polarization (6-13G ) with electron correlation. These studies revealed four stable minima for the system protonated acetaldehyde, CHj-C H-OH <-> CH3-CH=0+H the methoxymethyl cation, CH3OCH2 protonated oxirane, (CH2)2OH+ and vinylox-... 

Table 1 Xenon, comparison of orbital energies for numerical Dirac and ZORA and non relativistic calculations with basis set ZORA calculations in different Coulomb matrix approximations in the UGBS basis set...

A comprehensive comparison of various basis sets for the homodimers of HF and H2O offers hope that calculation of vibrational frequencies can be meaningful, even when restricted to the SCF level and with no account of anharmonicity. The frequencies are less demanding of basis set quality than are the intensities. Minimal basis sets are to be avoided in most cases, as are small split-valence sets such as 3-21G. In some cases, one can compute reasonable estimates of dimerization-induced frequency shifts with basis sets of 4-3IG type however, results with unpolarized basis sets can be deceptive. Polarization functions are strongly recommended for uniform quality of results, particularly if one is interested primarily in spectral changes induced by H-bond formation. Intensity calculations without polarization functions can be expected to yield only the crudest of estimates. Reasonable results can be achieved with only one set of such functions on each atom. In some cases, it may be useful to include diffuse + functions as well. 

Table 3. Comparison among the peaks in the density of states calculated using HF, BLYP, and MBPT(2) with basis sets 6-31G and 6-31G, respectively, and those measured by XPS and ARUPS [66] unit eV...

In addition to the technical aspects related to the size of molecular systems even more serious problem constitutes the elimination of the basis set dependence of components obtained within different interaction energy decompositions. The performance of various decompositions can be examined by comparison of corresponding results with the most accurate and unquestioned values obtained within rigorously defined perturbational approach with basis sets approaching Hartree-Fock limit. Such accurate results obtained within Symmetry Adapted Perturbation Theory (SAPT) are known for the smallest systems only He2 and H20)2 [6]. 

Plot E versus log t for both of these sets of data on the same graph. Now suppose that the units of the 45°C experiment are minutes instead of seconds (this is not the case, but we can pretend that it is). On the basis of this imaginary condition, each of the times at 45°C should be multiplied by the factor 60 sec/min to make the comparison with the 25°C data. Apply this correction to the 45°C data and plot on the original graph. Be sure to select a scale of the original graph so that corrected data can be accommodated also, label various portions clearly. Briefly comment on the results of this manipulation. 

Even more recent calculations using STO-3G and 6-31G basis sets could not safely predict diazomethane as the more stable compound in comparison with diazirine, although there is an experimental energy difference of 125 kJ moP 79JST(52)275). 

The MP2 treatment recovers the majority of the correlation effect, and the CCSD(T) results with the cc-pVQZ basis sets are in good agreement with the experimental values. The remaining discrepancies of 9cm , 13cm and lOcm are mainly due to basis set inadequacies, as indicated by the MP2/cc-pV5Z results. The MP2 values are in respectable agreement with the experimental harmonic frequencies, but of course still overestimate the experimental fundamental ones by the anharmonicity. For this reason, calculated MP2 harmonic frequencies are often scaled by 0.97 for comparison with experimental results. ... 

For comparison with experimental frequencies (which necessarily are anharmonic), there is normally little point in improving the theoretical level beyond MP2 with a TZ(2df,2pd) type basis set unless anharmonicity constants are calculated explicitly. Although anharmonicity can be approximately accounted for by scaling the harmonic frequencies by 0.97, the remaining errors in the harmonic force constants at this level are normally smaller than the corresponding errors due to variations in anharmonicity. 

The qualitative arguments we shall produce in the next sections are not affected by the lack of d functions in the sulphur basis set. This statement will be supported in detail by comparison of PP results with all-electron plus 3d ones, for the three-membered ring sulphur compounds (see Section IV.C.3). 

---