Molecular orbital basis

Each of these tools has advantages and limitations. Ab initio methods involve intensive computation and therefore tend to be limited, for practical reasons of computer time, to smaller atoms, molecules, radicals, and ions. Their CPU time needs usually vary with basis set size (M) as at least M correlated methods require time proportional to at least M because they involve transformation of the atomic-orbital-based two-electron integrals to the molecular orbital basis. As computers continue to advance in power and memory size, and as theoretical methods and algorithms continue to improve, ab initio techniques will be applied to larger and more complex species. When dealing with systems in which qualitatively new electronic environments and/or new bonding types arise, or excited electronic states that are unusual, ab initio methods are essential. Semi-empirical or empirical methods would be of little use on systems whose electronic properties have not been included in the data base used to construct the parameters of such models. 

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. 

CCSDTQ (CC singles, doubles, triples, and quadruples) (75-75), CCSDTQP (CC singles, doubles, triples, quadruples, and pentuples) (7P), etc. approaches are far too expensive for routine applications. For example, the full CCSDTQ method requires iterative steps that scale as ( g(/i )is the number of occupied (unoccupied) orbitals in the molecular orbital basis). This scaling restricts the applicability of the CCSDTQ approach to very small systems, consisting of 2 - 3 light atoms described by small basis sets. For comparison, CCSD(T) is an nln procedure in the iterative CCSD steps and an nl procedure in the non-iterative part related to the calculation of the triples (T) correction. In consequence, it is nowadays possible to perform the CCSD(T) calculations for systems with 10-20 atoms. The application of the local correlation formalism (80-82) enabled SchOtz and Werner to extend the applicability of the CCSD(T) approach to systems with 100 atoms (53, 83, 84). 

Once the requisite one- and two-electron integrals are available in the molecular orbital basis, the multiconfigurational wavefunction and energy calculation can begin. 

Once the requisite one- and two-electron integrals are available in the molecular orbital basis, the multiconfigurational wavefunction and energy calculation can begin. Each of these methods has its own approach to describing the configurations j included in the calculation and how the Cj amplitudes and the total energy E is to be determined. 

Fig. 3.7 The Heitler-London configuration A(1) B(2) and A(2) B(1) (a) and (b) respectively, where 0A and represent the atomic 1s orbitals centred on atoms A and respectively, and 1 and 2 represent the coordinates of the two (indistinguishable) electrons, (c) The molecular orbital basis function in the singlet state where electrons 1 and 2 have opposite spin, (d) The up and down spin eigenfunctions corresponding to local exchange fields of opposite sign on A and B.

Here h are the one-electron integrals including the electron kinetic energy and the electron-nuclear attraction terms, and gjjkl are the two-electron repulsion integrals defmed by (3 19). The summations in (3 24) are over the molecular orbital basis, and the definition is, of course, only valid as long as we work in this basis. Notice that the number of electrons does not appear in the defmition of the Hamiltonian. All such information is found in the Slater determinant basis. This is true for all operators in the second quantization formalism. 

Del Bene J, Pople JA (1973) Theory of molecular interactions. III. A comparison of studies of H20 polymers using different molecular orbital basis sets. J Chem Phys 58 3605 -3608... 

The PKS model has been criticized (27-29) for the assumption of a single frequency and its unsatisfactory description of the magnetic circular dichroism (MCD) found for the intervalence band of the Creutz-Taube ion (30). In a series of papers (31), Ondrechen and coworkers developed a more realistic three-site model for delocalized (class III) bridged mixed-valence complexes. This model incorporates many features of the PKS model but differs in that it explicitly includes the bridge, it uses a molecular orbital basis of one-electron functions, and the choice of important vibrational modes is not the same. The near-IR band line shape of the Creutz-Taube ion has been reasonably... 

Piepho has responded to the criticisms of the PKS model by developing an improved version, the MO vibronic coupling model for mixed-valence complexes (32). Multicenter vibrations are now considered and a molecular orbital basis set (as with the three-site model) is used. This model was used to calculate band shape and g values for the Cretuz-Taube ion (33). The MO vibronic coupling model is admittedly more empirical than the three-site model but it has the advantage in being applicable to all mixed-valence complexes. 

The interatomic distance, the binding energy per atom and the frequency of the totally symmetric motion for a tetrahedral Ni4 cluster are summarized in Table I for different choices of the molecular orbital basis and the two auxiliary basis sets. The starting point was basis set no. 1, a fl5s,llp,6d) molecular orbital basis (63). It was derived from an atomic basis (M) by adding one s-expo-... 

The effects of hydrogen bonding were described in Section 3-4. In this section, the molecular orbital basis for hydrogen bonding is described as an introduction to the frontier molecular orbital approach to acid-base behavior. 

Depending on the choice of molecular orbital basis, the earliest terms for certain excitation levels are naturally zero. For example, in Moller-Plesset theory, only... 

The presence of /,/ and components requires an iterative solution of this equation—an approach that necessitates storage of the T3 amplitudes in each iteration This scheme is unreasonable because the number of such amplitudes would rapidly become the computational bottleneck as the size of the molecular system increased. This problem may be circumvented, however, by utilizing the so-called semicanonical molecular orbital basis in which the occupied-occupied and virtual-virtual blocks of the Fock matrix are diagonal. In this basis, the two final terms in the T3 equation above vanish, and the conventional noniterative computational procedure described earlier in the chapter may be employed. 

This problem can be avoided, however, if an appropriate open-shell perturbation theory is defined such that the zeroth-order Hamiltonian is diagonal in the truly spin-restricted molecular orbital basis. The Z-averaged perturbation theory (ZAPT) defined by Lee and Jayatilaka fulfills this requirement. ZAPT takes advantage of the symmetric spin orbital basis. For each doubly occupied spatial orbital and each unoccupied spatial orbital, the usual a and P spin functions are used, but for the singly occupied orbitals, new spin functions. 

Clearly, it is desirable to make the length of the expansion in (15) as short as possible. The number of Slater determinants needed to obtain a given accuracy depends on the molecular orbital basis set used to construct the Slater determinants. There have been several proposals in the recent literature for suitable molecular orbital basis sets.81,88-90 It is generally agreed that the virtual Hartree-Fock orbitals (i.e. those Hartree-Fock orbitals which result from solving the standard Hartree-Fock orbital equations, but which are not used in the Hartree-Fock determinant) are a poor basis for expanding the wavefunction. A very important concept in connection with both the... 

---