Determinant basis atomic orbitals

We now examine how, in principle, given one of the roots of (2-29) (consider the /th—call it ef) which makes the secular determinant in (2-28) vanish, we can obtain the weighting-coefficients, cfr, r = 1,2,n, which satisfy the set of homogeneous equations (2-27) for this particular value of e. It will be recalled that in the discussion following equation (2-1) in the section concerning the LCAO-approach ( 2.1), it was stated that P in equation (2-1) should strictly be labelled with a subscript as more than one combination of the given basis atomic orbitals which will form what, on the Variation-Principle s criterion, we may regard as a suitable molecular orbital. In fact, our analysis here has confirmed that there... 

H was the matrix-component of the Hiickel effective-Hamiltonian operator, effective between two basis atomic-orbitals, 4>r and 4>s, Srs was the overlap integral between 4>r and s, and H was set equal to a, H to / . This is how we developed the simple HMO-approach in Chapter Two. What Roothaan did was to show that a formally similar determinant is obtained in a full treatment of the re-electrons, but that it involves a somewhat more complicated expression for the matrix-elements, H . Furthermore, he showed that this more-complicated expression somehow had to take into account interactions between any one re-electron and all the other re-electrons. We do not go into the details of this here, except to say that, in order to find the LCAO-MO coefficients for one molecular orbital, it is necessary to know all the others, because all the others appear in the expressions for the equivalent terms, Hrs. This is a very familiar situation which mathematicians have long known how to deal with and which we encountered during our discussion of the self-consistent" Huckel-methods in 7.2—7.5 it is necessary to use an iterative scheme. An initial guess is made of all the orbitals except one and these are used to calculate the H -terms for the one orbital which has not yet... 

H at m energy of 1.2 eV in the center-of-mass frame. By using an atomic orbital basis and a representation of the electronic state of the system in terms of a Thouless determinant and the protons as classical particles, the leading term of the electronic state of the reactants is... 

To this pom t, th e basic approxmi alien is th at th e total wave I lnic-tion IS a single Slater determinant and the resultant expression of the molecular orbitals is a linear combination of atomic orbital basis functions (MO-LCAO). In other words, an ah miiio calculation can be initiated once a basis for the LCAO is chosen. Mathematically, any set of functions can be a basis for an ah mitio calculation. However, there are two main things to be considered m the choice of the basis. First one desires to use the most efficient and accurate functions possible, so that the expansion (equation (49) on page 222). will require the few esl possible term s for an accurate representation of a molecular orbital. The second one is the speed of tW O-electron integral calculation. 

Ihe one-electron orbitals are commonly called basis functions and often correspond to he atomic orbitals. We will label the basis functions with the Greek letters n, v, A and a. n the case of Equation (2.144) there are K basis functions and we should therefore xpect to derive a total of K molecular orbitals (although not all of these will necessarily 3e occupied by electrons). The smallest number of basis functions for a molecular system vill be that which can just accommodate all the electrons in the molecule. More sophisti- ated calculations use more basis functions than a minimal set. At the Hartree-Fock limit he energy of the system can be reduced no further by the addition of any more basis unctions however, it may be possible to lower the energy below the Hartree-Fock limit ay using a functional form of the wavefunction that is more extensive than the single Slater determinant. 

Usually, contractions are determined from atomic SCFcalculations. In these calculations one uses a relatively large basis of uncontracted Gaussians, optimizes all exponents, and determines the SCF coefficients of each of the derived atomic orbitals. The optimized exponents and SCF coefficients can then be used to derive suitable contraction exponents and contraction coefficients for a smaller basis set to be used in subsequent molecular calculations. 

The CPHF equations are linear and can be determined by standard matrix operations. The size of the U matrix is the number of occupied orbitals times the number of virtual orbitals, which in general is quite large, and the CPHF equations are normally solved by iterative methods. Furthermore, as illustrated above, the CPHF equations may be formulated either in an atomic orbital or molecular orbital basis. Although the latter has computational advantages in certain cases, the former is more suitable for use in connection with direct methods (where the atomic integrals are calculated as required), as discussed in Section 3.8.5. 

The variational problem is to minimize the energy of a single Slater determinant by choosing suitable values for the MO coefficients, under the constraint that the MOs remain orthonormal. With cj) being an MO written as a linear combination of the basis functions (atomic orbitals) /, this leads to a set of secular equations, F being the Fock matrix, S the overlap matrix and C containing the MO coefficients (Section 3.5). 

The analytical determination of the derivative dEtotldrir of the total energy Etot with respect to population n, of the r-th molecular orbital is a very complicated task in the case of methods like the BMV one for three reasons (a), those methods assume that the atomic orbital (AO) basis is non-orthogonal (b), they involve nonlinear expressions in the AO populations (c) the latter may have to be determined as Mulliken or Lbwdin population, if they must have a physical significance [6]. The rest of this paper is devoted to the presentation of that derivation on a scheme having the essential features of the BMV scheme, but simplified to keep control of the relation between the symbols introduced and their physical significance. Before devoting ourselves to that derivation, however, we with to mention the reason why the MO occupation should be treated in certain problems as a continuous variable. 

The calculation performed for the metastable N (ls2s) + He system has necessitated somewhat larger Cl spaces (200-250 determinants) in order to reach the same perturbation threshold ri = 0.01, the la molecular orbital being not frozen for this calculation.The basis of atomic orbitals has been also expanded to a 10s6p3d basis of gaussian functions for nitrogen reoptimized on N (ls ) for the s exponents and on N (ls 2p) for the p exponents and added of one s and one p diffuse functions [22]. For such excited states,... 

Ab initio calculations usually begin with a solution of the Hartree-Fock equations, which assumes the electronic wavefunction can be written as a single determinant of molecular orbitals. The orbitals are described in terms of a basis set of atomic functions and the reliability of the calculation depends on the quality of the basis set being used. Basis sets have been developed over the years to produce reliable results with a minimum of computational cost. For example, double zeta valence basis sets such as 3-21G [15] 4-31G [16] and 6-31G [17] describe each atom in the molecule with a single core Is function and two functions for the valence s and p functions. Such basis sets are commonly used, as there appears to be a cancellation of errors, which fortuitously allows them to predict quite accurate results. 

The simple orbital basis expansion method which is used in the implementation of most models of molecular electronic structure consists of expanding each R as a linear combination of determinants of a set of (usually) atom-centred functions of one or two standard forms. In particular most qualitative and semi-quantitative theories restrict the terms in this expansion to consist of the (approximate) occupied atomic orbitals of the constituent atoms of the molecule. There are two types of symmetry constraint implicit in this technique. 

An important characteristic of ab initio computational methodology is the ability to approach the exact description - that is, the focal point [11] - of the molecular electronic structure in a systematic manner. In the standard approach, approximate wavefunctions are constructed as linear combinations of antisymmetrized products (determinants) of one-electron functions, the molecular orbitals (MOs). The quality of the description then depends on the basis of atomic orbitals (AOs) in terms of which the MOs are expanded (the one-electron space), and on how linear combinations of determinants of these MOs are formed (the n-electron space). Within the one- and n-electron spaces, hierarchies exist of increasing flexibility and accuracy. To understand the requirements for accurate calculations of thermochemical data, we shall in this section consider the one- and n-electron hierarchies in some detail [12]. 

Once one has specified an atomic orbital basis for each atom in the molecule, the LCAO-MO procedure can be used to determine the Cv,i coefficients that describe the... 

---