Double-zeta methods

Barone also introduces two new basis sets, EPR-Il and EPR-llI. These are optimized for the calculation of hyperfine coupling constants by density functional methods. EPR-Il is a double zeta basis set with a single set of polarization functions and an enhanced s part. EPR-III is a triple zeta set including diffuse functions, double d polarization functions and a single set off functions. 

Although there is no strict relationship between the basis sets developed for, and used in, conventional ah initio calculations and those applicable in DFT, the basis sets employed in molecular DFT calculations are usually the same or highly similar to those. For most practical purposes, a standard valence double-zeta plus polarization basis set (e.g. the Pople basis set 6-31G(d,p) [29] and similar) provides sufficiently accurate geometries and energetics when employed in combination with one of the more accurate functionals (B3LYP, PBEO, PW91). A somewhat sweeping statement is that the accuracy usually lies mid-way between that of M P2 and that of the CCSD(T) or G2 conventional wave-function methods. 

The conclusion above that optimisation of the non-linear parameters in the AO basis leads to a basis with correct spatial symmetry properties cannot be true for all intemuclear separations. At R = 0 the orbital basis must pass over into the double-zeta basis for helium i.e. two different 1 s orbital exponents. It would be astonishing if this transition were discontinuous at R = 0. While considering the variation of basis with intemuclear distance it is worth remembering that the closed-shell spin-eigenfunction MO method does not describe the molecule at all well for large values of R the spin-eigenfunction constraint of two electrons per spatial orbital is completely unrealistic at large intemuclear separation. With these facts in mind we have therefore computed the optimum orbital exponents as a function of R for three wave functions ... 

Figure 1. The shape of the potential curve for nitrogen in a correlation-consistent polarized double-zeta basis set is presented for the variational 2-RDM method as well as (a) single-reference coupled cluster, (b) multireference second-order perturbation theory (MRPT) and single-double configuration interaction (MRCl), and full configuration interaction (FCl) wavefunction methods. The symbol 2-RDM indicates that the potential curve was shifted by the difference between the 2-RDM and CCSD(T) energies at equilibrium.

All methods employ a correlation-consistent polarized double-zeta basis set. 

Figure 2. Comparison of the 2-RDM, coupled-cluster, MRPT2, and FCI potential energy surfaces of CO in a valence double-zeta basis set, where all valence electrons are correlated (a) without an electric field and (b) with an electric field of strength 0.10 an apphed in the direction of the permanent dipole moment. The 2-RDM and MRPT2 methods accurately describe the features of the FCI potential energy surface.

For Three Molecules in Valence Double-Zeta Basis Sets, a Comparison of Energies in Hartrees (H) from the 2-RDM Method with the T2 Condition (DQGT2) with the Energies from Second-Order Many-Body Perturbation Theory (MP2), Coupled-Cluster Method with Single-Double Excitations and a Perturbative Triples Correction (CCSD(T)), and Full Configuration Interaction (FCI)... 

The number of basis functions (defined by the chosen basis sets) used to construct the molecular orbitals also strongly affects the effort/accuracy ratio. The use of minimal basis sets yielded wrong results (56), whereas reasonable agreement with experiment is obtained when double zeta plus polarization basis sets are applied. Correlated methods require larger basis sets to include as much electron correlation as possible. This implies that in addition to the increased computational demand of such methods, a further increase of the computational cost results due to the requirement of using larger basis sets. 

The choice of the exchange correlation functional in the density functional theory (DFT) calculations is not very important, so long as a reasonable double-zeta basis set is used. In general, the parameterized model will not fit the quantum mechanical calculations well enough for improved DFT calculations to actually produce better-fitted parameters. In other words, the differences between the different DFT functionals will usually be small relative to the errors inherent in the potential model. A robust way to fit parameters is to use the downhill simplex method in the parameter space. Having available an initial set of parameters, taken from an analogous ion, facilities the fitting processes. 

In the seventies and eighties, ab initio calculations on potentially homoaromatic molecules were preferentially carried out with the Hartree-Fock (HF) method using minimal or double-zeta (DZ) basis sets. However, neither HF nor small basis sets are appropriate to describe a homoaromatic system. In the case of cyclopropyl homoconjugation, the use of a DZ + P basis set is mandatory since polarization (P) functions are needed to describe the bond arrangements of a three-membered ring. 

We employed Hartree-Fock (HF) method for the geometry optimizations and the JT potential calculation. Radom has reviewed computational studies on various molecular anions that includes only first raw elements [21], It has been concluded that reliable structural predictions may be made from single-determinant MO calculations with double-zeta basis sets. Furthermore, we applied second-order M0ller-Plesset (MP2) perturbation theory for the optimized geometries with HF... 

---