Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 184

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Calculation of electronic g‐tensors for transition metal complexes using hybrid density functionals and atomic meanfield spin‐orbit operators

Kaupp, Martin, Reviakine, Roman, Malkina, Olga L., Arbuznikov, Alexei, Schimmelpfennig, Bernd, Malkin, Vladimir G.·2002·Journal of Computational Chemistry

Abstract

We report the first implementation of the calculation of electronic g‐tensors by density functional methods with hybrid functionals. Spin‐orbit coupling is treated by the atomic meanfield approximation. g‐Tensors for a set of small main group radicals and for a series of ten 3d and two 4d transition metal complexes have been compared using the local density approximation (VWN functional), the generalized gradient approximation (BP86 functional), as well as B3‐type (B3PW91) and BH‐type (BHPW91) hybrid functionals. For main group radicals, the effect of exact‐exchange mixing is small. In contrast, significant differences between the various functionals arise for transition metal complexes. As has been shown previously, local and in particular gradient‐corrected functionals tend to underestimate the “paramagnetic” contributions to the g‐tensors in these cases and thereby recover only about 40–50% of the range of experimental g‐tensor components. This is improved to ca. 60% by the B3PW91 functional, which also gives slightly reduced standard deviations. The range increases to almost 100% using the half‐and‐half functional BHPW91. However, the quality of the correlation with experimental data worsens due to a significant overestimate of some intermediate g‐tensor values. The worse performance of the BHPW91 functional in these cases is accompanied by spin contamination. Although none of the functionals tested thus appears to be ideal for the treatment of electronic g‐tensors in transition metal complexes, the B3PW91 hybrid functional exhibited the overall most satisfactory performance. Apart from the validation of hybrid functionals, some aspects in the treatment of spin‐orbit contributions to the g‐tensor are discussed. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Comput Chem 23: 794–803, 2002

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jcc.10049

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Metadata

Authors
Kaupp, M., Reviakine, R., Malkina, O. L., Arbuznikov, A., Schimmelpfennig, B., & Malkin, V. G.
Venue
Journal of Computational Chemistry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-04-08
Volume
23
Issue
8
Pages
794-803
ISSN
  • 0192-8651 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-987X
OpenAlex
W2067859509
Cited by
184
References
1
FWCI
10.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Calculation of electronic g‐tensors for transition metal complexes using hybrid density functionals and atomic meanfield spin‐orbit operators. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/jcc.10049
The paper
Kaupp, M., Reviakine, R., Malkina, O. L., Arbuznikov, A., Schimmelpfennig, B., & Malkin, V. G. (2002). Calculation of electronic g‐tensors for transition metal complexes using hybrid density functionals and atomic meanfield spin‐orbit operators. Journal of Computational Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcc.10049

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.