Single-reference methods interactions approach

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. 

However, due to the availability of numerous techniques, it is important to point out here the differences and equivalence between schemes. To summarize, two EDA families can be applied to force field parametrization. The first EDA type of approach is labelled SAPT (Symmetry Adapted Perturbation Theory). It uses non orthogonal orbitals and recomputes the total interaction upon perturbation theory. As computations can be performed up to the Coupled-Cluster Singles Doubles (CCSD) level, SAPT can be seen as a reference method. However, due to the cost of the use of non-orthogonal molecular orbitals, pure SAPT approaches remain limited... 

The second step of the calculation involves the treatment of dynamic correlation effects, which can be approached by many-body perturbation theory (62) or configuration interaction (63). Multireference coupled-cluster techniques have been developed (64—66) but they are computationally far more demanding and still not established as standard methods. At this point, we will only focus on configuration interaction approaches. What is done in these approaches is to regard the entire zeroth-order wavefunc-tion Tj) or its constituent parts double excitations relative to these reference functions. This produces a set of excited CSFs ( Q) that are used as expansion space for the configuration interaction (Cl) procedure. The resulting wavefunction may be written as... 

In the last 20 years, Cl calculations based on a single reference function have lost favor among practitioners. The principal shortcoming of these approaches is that they do not satisfy the property of size-consistency, which means that the Cl energy does not scale properly with the size of the system [112]. It is fairly easy to see why this is so. Consider two beryllium atoms, separated by a distance sufficiently large that the true physical interaction between the atoms vanishes. In a CISD description of this system, contributions to the wave function are excluded in which two electrons on each beryllium atom are in virtual orbitals, since these correspond to quadruply excited determinants and would require a method such as CISDQ or CISDTQ for their inclusion. However, the CISD wave function for a single beryllium atom contains all determinants with two electrons in virtual orbitals. Since Cl methods involve... 

---