Split valence basis sets generally give much better results than minimal ones, but at a cost. Remember that the number of two-electron integrals is proportional to kf , where W is the number of basis functions. Whereas STO-3G has only live ba.sis functions for carbon, 6-31G has nine, resulting in more than a tenfold increase in the size of the calculation,... [Pg.385]

Although split valence basis sets give far better results than minimal ones, they still have systematic weaknesses, such as a poor description of three-inembered rings, This results from their inability to polarize the electron density to one side of an atom. Consider the /T-bond shown in Figure 7-23. [Pg.385]

Basis sets can be extended indefinitely. The highest MOs in anions and weakly bound lone pairs, for instance, are very diffuse maybe more so than the most diffuse basis functions in a spht valence basis set. In this case, extra diffuse functions must be added to give a diffuse augmented basis set. An early example of such a basis set is 6-31+G [26]. Basis sets may also be split more than once and have many sets of polarization functions. [Pg.386]

Th e con traction expon en ts and cocfTicien ts of th e d-type functions were optinii/ed using five d-primitives (the first set of d-type functions) for the STO-XG basis sets and six d-primitives (the second set of d-type functions ) for the split-valence basis sets. Thus, five d orbitals are recommended for the STO-XG basis sets and six d orhitals for the split-valence basis sets. [Pg.116]

Split-Valence Basis Sets. In split-valence basis sets, inner or core atomic orbitals ar e represented by one basis function and valence atomic orbitals are represented by two. The carbon atom in methane is represented by one Is inner orbital and 2(2s, 2pj., 2py, 2pj) = 8 valence orbitals. Each hydrogen atom is represented by 2 valence orbitals hence, the number of orbitals is... [Pg.310]

A second issue is the practice of using the same set of exponents for several sets of functions, such as the 2s and 2p. These are also referred to as general contraction or more often split valence basis sets and are still in widespread use. The acronyms denoting these basis sets sometimes include the letters SP to indicate the use of the same exponents for s andp orbitals. The disadvantage of this is that the basis set may suffer in the accuracy of its description of the wave function needed for high-accuracy calculations. The advantage of this scheme is that integral evaluation can be completed more quickly. This is partly responsible for the popularity of the Pople basis sets described below. [Pg.79]

Unlike semiempirical methods that are formulated to completely neglect the core electrons, ah initio methods must represent all the electrons in some manner. However, for heavy atoms it is desirable to reduce the amount of computation necessary. This is done by replacing the core electrons and their basis functions in the wave function by a potential term in the Hamiltonian. These are called core potentials, elfective core potentials (ECP), or relativistic effective core potentials (RECP). Core potentials must be used along with a valence basis set that was created to accompany them. As well as reducing the computation time, core potentials can include the effects of the relativistic mass defect and spin coupling terms that are significant near the nuclei of heavy atoms. This is often the method of choice for heavy atoms, Rb and up. [Pg.84]

The most common way of including relativistic effects in a calculation is by using relativisticly parameterized effective core potentials (RECP). These core potentials are included in the calculation as an additional term in the Hamiltonian. Core potentials must be used with the valence basis set that was created for use with that particular core potential. Core potentials are created by htting a potential function to the electron density distribution from an accurate relativistic calculation for the atom. A calculation using core potentials does not have any relativistic terms, but the effect of relativity on the core electrons is included. [Pg.262]

Binkley, J.S. Pople, J.A. Hehre, W.J. Self-consistent molecular orbital methods. 21. Small split-valence basis sets for first-row elements J. Am. Chem. Soc. 102 939-947, 1980. [Pg.110]

Split Valence Basis Sets Polarized Basis Sets Diffuse Functions Pseudopotentials... [Pg.97]

The first way that a basis set can be made larger is to increase the number of basis functions per atom. Split valence basis sets, such as 3-21G and 6-31G, have two (or more) sizes of basis function for each valence orbital. For example, hydrogen and carbon are represented as ... [Pg.98]

The double zeta basis sets, such as the Dunning-Huzinaga basis set (D95), form all molecular orbitals from linear combinations of two sizes of functions for each atomic orbital. Similarly, triple split valence basis sets, like 6-3IIG, use three sizes of contracted functions for each orbital-type. [Pg.98]

Split valence basis sets allow orbitals to change size, but not to change shape. Polarized basis sets remove this limitation by adding orbitals with angular momentum beyond what is required for the ground state to the description of each atom. For example, polarized basis sets add d functions to carbon atoms and f functions to transition metals, and some of them add p functions to hydrogen atoms. [Pg.98]

We can further conclude that the success of the Cl-Singles method often depends critically on the chosen basis set. Diffuse (Rydberg-like) excited states usually require the addition of one or two diffuse functions to a split-valence basis set. [Pg.224]

The chemical bonding occurs between valence orbitals. Doubling the 1 s-functions in for example carbon allows for a better description of the 1 s-electrons. However, the Is-orbital is essentially independent of the chemical environment, being very close to the atomic case. A variation of the DZ type basis only doubles the number of valence orbitals, producing a split valence basis. In actual calculations a doubling of tire core orbitals would rarely be considered, and the term DZ basis is also used for split valence basis sets (or sometimes VDZ, for valence double zeta). [Pg.152]

The next step up in basis set size is a Triple Zeta (TZ). Such a basis contains three times as many functions as tire minimum basis, i.e. six s-functions and three p-functions for the first row elements. Some of the core orbitals may again be saved by only splitting the valence, producing a triple split valence basis set. Again the term TZ is used to cover both cases. The names Quadruple Zeta (QZ) and Quintuple Zeta (5Z, not QZ) for the next levels of basis sets are also used, but large sets are often given explicitly in terms of the number of basis functions of each type. [Pg.152]

The starting point is our previously performed calculations [3] using the Huzinaga basis set [20] (9s) for Be and (4s) for H, triple-zeta contracted, supplemented by the three 2p orbitals proposed for Be by Ahlrichs and Taylor [21] with exponents equal to 1.2, 0.3 and 0.05 respectively. This initial basis set, noted I, includes one s-type bond-function the exponent of which is equal to 0.5647. Several sets of diffuse orbitals have then been added to this basis I. Their corresponding exponents were determined by downward extrapolation from the valence basis set, using the Raffenetti [22] and Ahlrichs [21] procedure. Three supplementary basis sets noted II, III and IV containing respectively one, two and three... [Pg.314]

Stuttgart pseudopotential for Au with a uncontracted (lls/10p/7d/5f) valence basis set and a Dunning augmented correlation consistent valence triple-zeta sets (aug-cc-pVTZ) for both C and N, but with the most diffuse f function removed, was used. [Pg.210]

See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.148 , Pg.156 , Pg.156 , Pg.159 , Pg.160 , Pg.161 ]

© 2019 chempedia.info