Configuration interaction linear variations method

Configuration Interaction A variational method with the trial wave function in the form of a linear combination of the given set of the Slater determinants. 

The correspond to different electron configurations. In configuration interaction o is the Hartree-Fock function (or an approximation to it in a truncated basis set) and the other 4>t are constructed from virtual orbitals which are the by-product of the Hartree-Fock calculation. The coefficients Ci are found by the linear-variation method. Unfortunately, the so constructed are usually an inadequate basis for the part of the wavefunction not represented by [Pg.5]

On the other side, the linear variational method can be practiced within the configuration interaction (Cl) approach of the many-electronic wave-function ... 

The lack of correlation is the actual source of aU errors. In particular, a Slater determinant incorporates exchange correlation, i.e., the motion of two electrons with parallel spins is correlated (the so-called Fermi correlation). Unfortunately, the motion of electrons with opposite spins remains uncorrelated. It is common to define correlation energy, corr> as the difference between the exact nonrelativistic energy of the system, eo, and the Hartree-Fock energy, Eo, obtained in the limit that the basis set approaches completeness Ecorr = fo - o- The simplest manner to understand the inclusion of the correlation effects is through the method of configuration interaction (Cl). The basic idea is to diagonalize the N-electron Hamiltonian in a basis of N-electron functions we represent the exact wave function as a linear combination of N-electron trial functions and use the linear variational method. 

This is perhaps the easiest method to understand. It is based on the variational principle (Appendix B), analogous to the HF method. The trial wave function is written as a linear combination of determinants with the expansion coefficients determined by requiring that the energy should be a minimum (or at least stationary), a procedure known as Configuration Interaction (Cl). The MOs used for building the excited Slater determinants are taken from a Hartree-Fock calculation and held fixed. Subscripts S, D, T etc. indicate determinants which are singly, doubly, triply etc. excited relative to the... 

In optimized multi-configuration or multi-configuration SCF (MCSCF) methods the coefficients Ci and the orbitals from which the are constructed are varied simultaneously. This is in principle a much more satisfactory process. It achieves energies comparable with those from configuration interaction calculations and yet provides much simpler wavefunctions (i.e. fewer configurations) however, the variation problem is non-linear, and the resulting technical difficulties have inhibited wide use of the method. 

There are a few minor variations on the CC methods. The quadratic configuration interaction including singles and doubles (QCISD)" ° method is nearly equivalent to CCSD. Another variation on CCSD is to use the Brueckner orbitals. Brueckner orbitals are a set of MOs produced as a linear combination of the HF MOs such that all of the amplitudes of the singles configurations ( f) are zero. This method is called BD and differs from CCSD method only in fifth order." Inclusion of triples configurations in a perturbative way, BD(T), is frequently more stable (convergence of the wavefunction is often smoother) than in the CCSD(T) treatment. 

Presently, the widely used post-Hartree-Fock approaches to the correlation problem in molecular electronic structure calculations are basically of two kinds, namely, those of variational and those of perturbative nature. The former are typified by various configuration interaction (Cl) or shell-model methods, and employ the linear Ansatz for the wave function in the spirit of Ritz variation principle (c/, e.g. Ref. [21]). However, since the dimension of the Cl problem rapidly increases with increasing size of the system and size of the atomic orbital (AO) basis set employed (see, e.g. the so-called Paldus-Weyl dimension formula [22,23]), one has to rely in actual applications on truncated Cl expansions (referred to as a limited Cl), despite the fact that these expansions are slowly convergent, even when based on the optimal natural orbitals (NOs). Unfortunately, such limited Cl expansions (usually truncated at the doubly excited level relative to the IPM reference, resulting in the CISD method) are unable to properly describe the so-called dynamic correlation, which requires that higher than doubly excited configurations be taken into account. Moreover, the energies obtained with the limited Cl method are not size-extensive. 

To overcome the deficiencies of the Hartree-Fock wave function (for example, improper behavior R oo and incorrect values), one can introduce configuration interaction (Cl), thus going beyond the Hartree-Fock approximation. Recall (Section 11.3) that in a molecular Cl calculation one begins with a set of basis functions Xi, does an SCF calculation to find SCf occupied and virtual (unoccupied) MOs, uses these MOs to form configuration (state) functions writes the molecular wave function i/ as a linear combination 2/ of the configuration functions, and uses the variation method to find the ft, s. In calculations on diatomic molecules, the basis functions can be Slater-type AOs, some centered on one atom, the remainder on the second atom. 

For many years configuration interaction was regarded as the method of choice in describing electron correlation effeets in atoms and moleeules. The method is robust and systematic being firmly based on the Rayleigh-Ritz variational principle. The total electronie wavefimetion, is written as a linear eombination of A/ -electron determinantal functions, < >, ,... 

PHF methods can, in turn, be classified as the variational and nonvariational ones. In the former gronp of methods the coefficients in linear combination of Slater determinants and in some cases LCAO coefficients in HF MOs are optimized in the PHF calculations, in the latter such an optimization is absent. To the former group of PHF methods one refers different versions of the configuration interaction (Cl) method, the multi-configuration self-consistent field (MCSCF) method, the variational coupled cluster (CC) approach and the rarely used valence bond (VB) and generaUzed VB methods. The nonvariational PHF methods inclnde the majority of CC reaUza-tions and many-body perturbation theory (MBPT), called in its molecular realization the MoUer-Plessett (MP) method. In MP calculations not only RHF but UHF MOs are also used [107]. 

---