Localization of orbitals

A masterpiece written by a Nobel Prize winner, one of the founders of solid-state quantum chemistry. Solid-state theory was traditionally the domain of physicists. Some concepts typical of chemistry, such as atomic orbitals, bonding and antibonding effects, chemical bonds, and localization of orbitals, were usually absent in such descriptions. They are highlighted in this book. 

The LMTO method [58, 79] can be considered to be the linear version of the KKR teclmique. According to official LMTO historians, the method has now reached its third generation [79] the first starting with Andersen in 1975 [58], the second connnonly known as TB-LMTO. In the LMTO approach, the wavefimction is expanded in a basis of so-called muffin-tin orbitals. These orbitals are adapted to the potential by constmcting them from solutions of the radial Scln-ddinger equation so as to fomi a minimal basis set. Interstitial properties are represented by Hankel fiinctions, which means that, in contrast to the LAPW teclmique, the orbitals are localized in real space. The small basis set makes the method fast computationally, yet at the same time it restricts the accuracy. The localization of the basis fiinctions diminishes the quality of the description of the wavefimction in die interstitial region. 

One current limitation of orbital-free DFT is that since only the total density is calculated, there is no way to identify contributions from electronic states of a certain angular momentum character /. This identification is exploited in non-local pseudopotentials so that electrons of different / character see different potentials, considerably improving the quality of these pseudopotentials. The orbital-free metliods thus are limited to local pseudopotentials, connecting the quality of their results to the quality of tlie available local potentials. Good local pseudopotentials are available for the alkali metals, the alkaline earth metals and aluminium [100. 101] and methods exist for obtaining them for other atoms (see section VI.2 of [97]). 

Molecular orbitals are not unique. The same exact wave function could be expressed an infinite number of ways with different, but equivalent orbitals. Two commonly used sets of orbitals are localized orbitals and symmetry-adapted orbitals (also called canonical orbitals). Localized orbitals are sometimes used because they look very much like a chemist s qualitative models of molecular bonds, lone-pair electrons, core electrons, and the like. Symmetry-adapted orbitals are more commonly used because they allow the calculation to be executed much more quickly for high-symmetry molecules. Localized orbitals can give the fastest calculations for very large molecules without symmetry due to many long-distance interactions becoming negligible. 

Structure. The straiued configuration of ethylene oxide has been a subject for bonding and molecular orbital studies. Valence bond and early molecular orbital studies have been reviewed (28). Intermediate neglect of differential overlap (INDO) and localized molecular orbital (LMO) calculations have also been performed (29—31). The LMO bond density maps show that the bond density is strongly polarized toward the oxygen atom (30). Maximum bond density hes outside of the CCO triangle, as suggested by the bent bonds of valence—bond theory (32). The H-nmr spectmm of ethylene oxide is consistent with these calculations (33). 

The C-C distance in CaC2 is close to that in ethyne (120.5 pm) and it has been suggested that the observed increase in the lanthanoid and actin-oid carbides results from a partial localization of the supernumerary electron in the antibonding orbital of the ethynide ion [C=C] (see p. 932). The effect is noticeably less in the sesquicarbides than in the dicarbides. The compounds EuC2 and YbC2 differ in their lattice parameters and hydrolysis behaviour from the other LnC2 and this may be related to the relative stability of Eu and Yb (p. 1237). 

One of the goals of Localized Molecular Orbitals (LMO) is to derive MOs which are approximately constant between structurally similar units in different molecules. A set of LMOs may be defined by optimizing the expectation value of an two-electron operator The expectation value depends on the n, parameters in eq. (9.19), i.e. this is again a function optimization problem (Chapter 14). In practice, however, the localization is normally done by performing a series of 2 x 2 orbital rotations, as described in Chapter 13. 

An error function depending on parameters. Only minima are of interest, and the global minimum is usually (but not always) desired. This may for example be determination of parameters in a force field, a set of atomic charges, or a set of localized Molecular Orbitals. 

---