Electron correlation methods configuration interaction

The ideal calculation would use an infinite basis set and encompass complete incorporation of electron correlation (full configuration interaction). Since this is not feasible in practice, a number of compound methods have been introduced which attempt to approach this limit through additivity and/or extrapolation procedures. Such methods (e.g. G3 [14], CBS-Q [15] and Wl [16]) make it possible to approximate results with a more complete incorporation of electron correlation and a larger basis set than might be accessible from direct calculations. Table 6.1 presents the principal features of a selection of these methods. 

The second consideration in choosing a method is the level of electron correlation. A range of methods from no electron correlation (Hartree-Fock methods) to full configuration interaction is available however, the more extensive the electron correlation, the more computationally demanding the calculations become. Some electron correlation methods, such as the Mpller-Plesset method, can scale as N5 where N is the number of electrons.45 One can imagine that such methods become impractical for larger model systems. 

R ELECTRON CORRELATION METHODS 4.10 COUPLED CLUSTER, CONFIGURATION INTERACTION AND PERTURBATION THEORY 139 ... 

Sum Over States (SOS). This method computes molecular orbitals, from which values for transition fi equencies may be calculated. First the electronic ground state of the molecular system is determined, after which one may apply either the Hartree-Fock-Roothan method or the LCAO (hnear combination of atomic orbitals) approximation. Then one accoimts for correlations by configuration interaction calculations to form the lowest-energy excited states and transition dipole moments of the molecule. Finally transition frequencies and dipole moments are employed along with the formulas for the hyperpolarizabilities. The SOS method needs as input, energies and transition moments for excited states. It yields Pico) directly (eq. 1) identification of contributing excited states is important. 

One of the original approximate methods is the wavefunction-theory-based Hartree-Fock (HF) method [40]. The HF method is a single determinant method that does not include any correlation interactions between the electrons, and as such has limited accuracy [41, 42]. Higher level wavefunction-based methods such as coupled cluster [43 5], configuration interaction [40,46,47], and complete active space [48-50] methods include multiple determinants to incorporate some of the electron-electron correlation. Methods based on perturbation theory, such as second order Mpller-Plesset perturbation theory [51], go beyond the HF method by perturbatively adding electron correlation. These correlated wavefunction-based methods have well-defined ways in which they approach the exact solution to the Schrodinger equation and thus have the potential to be extremely accurate, but this accuracy comes at a price [52]. 

Extended articles on the most common electron correlation methods such as limited configuration interaction (Cl see Configuration Interaction), M0ller-Plesset many-body perturbation theory (MBPT see M0ller Plesset Perturbation Theory), variation-perturbation methods (such as PCILO see Complete Active Space Self-consistent Field (CASSCF) Second-order Perturbation Theory (CASPT2) and Configuration Interaction), and coupled cluster theory (CC see Coupled-cluster Theory), as well as on explicitly ri2-dependent wave functions (see rxi Dependent Wave functions), can be found elsewhere. 

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. 

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... 

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. 

If we except the Density Functional Theory and Coupled Clusters treatments (see, for example, reference [1] and references therein), the Configuration Interaction (Cl) and the Many-Body-Perturbation-Theory (MBPT) [2] approaches are the most widely-used methods to deal with the correlation problem in computational chemistry. The MBPT approach based on an HF-SCF (Hartree-Fock Self-Consistent Field) single reference taking RHF (Restricted Hartree-Fock) [3] or UHF (Unrestricted Hartree-Fock ) orbitals [4-6] has been particularly developed, at various order of perturbation n, leading to the widespread MPw or UMPw treatments when a Moller-Plesset (MP) partition of the electronic Hamiltonian is considered [7]. The implementation of such methods in various codes and the large distribution of some of them as black boxes make the MPn theories a common way for the non-specialist to tentatively include, with more or less relevancy, correlation effects in the calculations. 

---