Wave Function Electronic Structure Methods

Simple textbook results for IPs and EAs serve as a starting point for thinking about quantum chemistry calculations. If we assume that the nonionized molecule is described by a Hartree-Fock wave function, and furthermore if we neglect any relaxation of the MOs on electron attachment or detachment - that is, if we use the neutral molecule s MOs to construct a Slater determinant for the ionized species, removing an electron from the HOMO or adding an electron to the LUMO - then the corresponding approximate IP and EA expressions are known as KT 35 

In the case of EAs, however, the species where orbital relaxation is neglected (the anion) is also the species having the larger correlation energy, so if both effects are included then the net result is to move further away from such, errors in KT EAs tend to be much larger than errors 

0 is an orbital energy (equal to the KT prediction of the VAE), computed in Ref. 233 at the Hartree-Fock/3-21G level. The VAEs measured experimentally and used to fit Eq. [32] range from 2 to 10 eV, meaning that the corresponding Hartree-Fock orbital energies lie in the range 5-16 eV, according to Eq. [32]. In other words, the combination of orbital relaxation, electron correlation, and finite-basis effects (since 3-2IG is far from the basis-set limit) modifies the KT prediction for the VAEs by 3-6 eV  

That said, and while KT EAs do still find some utility in stabilization calculations of temporary anion resonances (as discussed later in this chapter), for bound states of M there is little reason to rely on KT since Hartree-Fock calculations are nowadays computationally facile on large molecules, often in large basis sets. It is therefore easy to compute a ASCF value for the EA, which includes the effects of orbital relaxation, simply by computing separately the Hartree-Eock energies of M and M , assuming that the latter is bound. (If it is not, then neither the KT nor the ASCE value of the EA is reliable.) This raises an important point, namely, that one obtains a positive EA from KT only when lumo for very weakly-bound anions there may be 

Much has been made of the critical role of electron correlation effects in the description of weakly-bound anions.As with any electronic structure problem, electron correlation is always quantitatively important and occasionally qualitatively important. Cases where correlation is qualitatively important include certain anions with very small VDEs, where dipole binding effects alone (which might be reasonably well-described at the Hartree-Fock 

---

By including electron correlation in the wave function the UHF method introduces more biradical character into the wave function than RHF. The spin contamination part is also purely biradical in nature, i.e. a UHF treatment in general will overestimate the biradical character. Most singlet states are well described by a closed-shell wave function near the equilibrium geometry, and in those cases it is not possible to generate a UHF solution which has a lower energy than the RHF. There are systems, however, for which this does not hold. An example is the ozone molecule, where two types of resonance structure can be drawn. Figure 4.8. 

Most of the commonly used electronic-structure methods are based upon Hartree-Fock theory, with electron correlation sometimes included in various ways (Slater, 1974). Typically one begins with a many-electron wave function comprised of one or several Slater determinants and takes the one-electron wave functions to be molecular orbitals (MO s) in the form of linear combinations of atomic orbitals (LCAO s) (An alternative approach, the generalized valence-bond method (see, for example, Schultz and Messmer, 1986), has been used in a few cases but has not been widely applied to defect problems.)... 

To evaluate an expectation value with the VMC method, a Metropolis walk is generally employed [20, 21]. The procedure begins with an initial distribution of points generated using a wave function obtained from an independent electronic structure method, followed by selection of subsequent sets of points until the collection of points is distributed as mod squared of the trial wave function, i.e.,... 

The main purpose of this chapter is to present the basics of ab initio molecular dynamics, focusing on the practical aspects of the simulations, and in particular, on modeling chemical reactions. Although CP-MD is a general molecular dynamics scheme which potentially can be applied in combination with any electronic structure method, the Car-Parinello MD is usually implemented within the framework of density functional theory with plane-waves as the basis set. Such an approach is conceptually quite distant from the commonly applied static approaches of quantum-chemistry with atom-centered basis sets. Therefore, a main... 

In this section, we provide a brief account of the different theoretical methods used in the study of electronic structure. This includes two families of methods that arise from the principles of quantum mechanics, the ab initio methods of computation of electronic wave functions and the methods based on DFT. The choice of a particular computational method must contemplate the problem to be solved and in any case is a compromise between accuracy and feasibility. Details of the methods outlined in this section can be found in specialized references, monographs [71], and textbooks [72]. 

The use of the SOS expressions in conjunction with approximate states (vibrational or electronic) provide us with methods to use in practical calculations. The electronic wave functions and transition moments can be determined with our standard electronic structure methods (SCF, CI, MCSCF, etc.) and the vibrational wave functions and transition moments (if considered) are determined using the potential energy surfaces. The SOS formulas may be formally separated into electronic and vibrational contributions to the properties (see Section 4), and this fact makes the SOS expressions pertinent in all calculations regardless of the choice of electronic structure method. Criticism of the SOS approach mainly concerns calculations of the electronic contributions to the properties as the SOS technique is often hampered by slow convergence with respect to Ute number of states that need to be included in the summations. It has been used wltlt success only for very small systems, most notably by Bishop and co-workers in a- and y-calculations of calibratlonal quality on helium [12] and Hj [13]. 

As mentioned above, the detailed computationally tractable formulas for the response functions for any given electronic structure methods are quite involved. If 0) denotes a wave function in the absence of the external field, the time-dependent reference state is expressed using an exponential operator... 

One somewhat displeasing detail in the approximate polarization propagator methods discussed in the previous section is the fact that concern needs to be made as to which formulation of wave mechanics that is used. This point has been elegantly resolved by Christiansen et al. in their quasi-energy formulation of response theory [23], in which a general and unified theory is presented for the evaluation of response functions for variational as well as nonvariational electronic structure methods. 

---