Electron correlation interactions

There have been extensive experimental and theoretical studies devoted to the structural and bonding characterization of weakly bound van der Waals complexes of acetylene. Structures of these complexes can often be determinated experimentally by means of Fourier transform microwave and infrared spectroscopic techniques. On the theoretical side, advanced treatments are required to understand the complex nature of the weak bonding in terms of the relative contributions of polarization and dispersion interactions, interactions of multiple moments, and electrostatic interactions involved in these completes. To determine the interaction energy in a weak complex, it is necessary to use large basis sets with the inclusion of electron correlation interactions. Theoretical calculations have been reported for van der Waals complexes of acetylene with COj [160], CO [161, 162], AICI3 [163], NH3 [164], He [165], Ar [166], H2O [167], HCN [168], HF [169-172], HCl [173, 174], and acetylene itself in the forms of non-covalent dimer [175-180], trimer [175,181], tetramer [175, 182, 183], and pentamer [175]. These calculations are very useful for the determination of multiple isomeric forms of the complex. For example, calculations at the MP2/6-31G level along with IR spectra indicate that the HCN-acetylene complex exists in a linear form in addition to the T-shaped structure observed previously by microwave studies (see Fig. 1-5) [168]. 

As with SCRF-PCM only macroscopic electrostatic contribntions to the Gibbs free energy of solvation are taken into account, short-range effects which are limited predominantly to the first solvation shell have to be considered by adding additional tenns. These correct for the neglect of effects caused by solnte-solvent electron correlation inclnding dispersion forces, hydrophobic interactions, dielectric saturation in the case of... 

Con figuration Interaction (or electron correlation ) improves energy ealeii lalion s usin g CNDO, INDO,. MINLO/3,. MXDO, A.M 1, PM3, /INFiO/1, and /.INDO/S for th ese electron con figuration s... 

A is a parameter that can be varied to give the correct amount of ionic character. Another way to view the valence bond picture is that the incorporation of ionic character corrects the overemphasis that the valence bond treatment places on electron correlation. The molecular orbital wavefimction underestimates electron correlation and requires methods such as configuration interaction to correct for it. Although the presence of ionic structures in species such as H2 appears coimterintuitive to many chemists, such species are widely used to explain certain other phenomena such as the ortho/para or meta directing properties of substituted benzene compounds imder electrophilic attack. Moverover, it has been shown that the ionic structures correspond to the deformation of the atomic orbitals when daey are involved in chemical bonds. 

A very important difference between H2 and molecular orbital calculations is electron correlation. Election correlation is the term used to describe interactions between elections in the same molecule. In the hydrogen molecule ion, there is only one election, so there can be no election correlation. The designators given to the calculations in Table 10-1 indicate first an electron correlation method and second a basis set, for example, MP2/6-31 G(d,p) designates a Moeller-Plesset electron coiTclation extension beyond the Hartiee-Fock limit canied out with a 6-31G(d,p) basis set. 

One of the limitations of HF calculations is that they do not include electron correlation. This means that HF takes into account the average affect of electron repulsion, but not the explicit electron-electron interaction. Within HF theory the probability of finding an electron at some location around an atom is determined by the distance from the nucleus but not the distance to the other electrons as shown in Figure 3.1. This is not physically true, but it is the consequence of the central field approximation, which defines the HF method. 

Electron correlation is often very important as well. The presence of multiple bonding interactions, such as pi back bonding, makes coordination compounds more sensitive to correlation than organic compounds. In some cases, the HF wave function does not provide even a qualitatively correct description of the compound. If the weight of the reference determinant in a single-reference CISD calculation is less than about 0.9, then the HF wave function is not qualitatively correct. In such cases, multiple-determinant, MSCSF, CASPT2, or MRCI calculations tend to be the most efficient methods. The alternative is... 

Configuration Interaction (or electron correlation) adds to the single determinant of the Hartree-Fock wave function a linear combination of determinants that play the role of atomic orbitals. This is similar to constructing a molecular orbital as a linear combination of atomic orbitals. Like the LCAO approximation. Cl calculations determine the weighting of each determinant to produce the lowest energy ground state (see SCFTechnique on page 43). 

Configuration Interaction (or electron correlation) improves energy calculationsusing CNDO, INDO, MINDO/3, MNDO, AMI, PM3, ZINDO/1, and ZINDO/Sfor these electron configurations... 

Each cell in the chart defines a model chemistry. The columns correspond to differcni theoretical methods and the rows to different basis sets. The level of correlation increases as you move to the right across any row, with the Hartree-Fock method jI the extreme left (including no correlation), and the Full Configuration Interaction method at the right (which fuUy accounts for electron correlation). In general, computational cost and accuracy increase as you move to the right as well. The relative costs of different model chemistries for various job types is discussed in... 

As we have seen throughout this book, the Hartree-Fock method provides a reasonable model for a wide range of problems and molecular systems. However, Hartree-Fock theory also has limitations. They arise principally from the fact that Hartree-Fock theory does not include a full treatment of the effects of electron correlation the energy contributions arising from electrons interacting with one another. For systems and situations where such effects are important, Hartree-Fock results may not be satisfactory. The theory and methodology underlying electron correlation is discussed in Appendix A. 

DFT methods compute electron correlation via general functionals of the electron density (see Appendix A for details). DFT functionals partition the electronic energy into several components which are computed separately the kinetic energy, the electron-nuclear interaction, the Coulomb repulsion, and an exchange-correlation term accounting for the remainder of the electron-electron interaction (which is itself... 

The term ( iv X.o) in Equation 32 signifies the two-electron repulsion integrals. Under the Hartree-Fock treatment, each electron sees all of the other electrons as an average distribution there is no instantaneous electron-electron interaction included. Higher level methods attempt to remedy this neglect of electron correlation in various ways, as we shall see. 

To illustrate the CISD technique, consider dineon (Figure 11.9). HF theory cannot hope to give an accurate description of the dispersion interaction between two neon atoms, so an electron correlation treatment is vital. Here are the results for a separation of 300 pm. 

Quadratic Configuration Interaction. A general technique for determining electron correlation energies... 

There are three main methods for calculating electron correlation Configuration Interaction (Cl), Many Body Perturbation Theory (MBPT) and Coupled Cluster (CC). A word of caution before we describe these methods in more details. The Slater determinants are composed of spin-MOs, but since the Hamilton operator is independent of spin, the spin dependence can be factored out. Furthermore, to facilitate notation, it is often assumed that the HF determinant is of the RHF type. Finally, many of the expressions below involve double summations over identical sets of functions. To ensure only the unique terms are included, one of the summation indices must be restricted. Alternatively, both indices can be allowed to run over all values, and the overcounting corrected by a factor of 1/2. Various combinations of these assumptions result in final expressions which differ by factors of 1 /2, 1/4 etc. from those given here. In the present book the MOs are always spin-MOs, and conversion of a restricted summation to an unrestricted is always noted explicitly. 

It is important to realize that whenever qualitative or frontier molecular orbital theory is invoked, the description is within the orbital (Hartree-Fock or Density Functional) model for the electronic wave function. In other words, rationalizing a trend in computational results by qualitative MO theory is only valid if the effect is present at the HF or DFT level. If the majority of the variation is due to electron correlation, an explanation in terms of interacting orbitals is not appropriate. 

---