The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Benchmarking Excited-State Calculations Using Exciton Properties
Open accessAbstract
Benchmarking is an every-day task in computational chemistry, yet making meaningful comparisons between different methods is nontrivial. Benchmark studies often focus on the most obvious quantities such as energy differences. But to gain insight, it is desirable to explain the discrepancies between theoretical methods in terms of underlying wave functions and, consequently, physically relevant quantities. We present a new strategy of benchmarking excited-state calculations, which goes beyond excitation energies and oscillator strengths and involves the analysis of exciton properties based on the one-particle transition density matrix. By using this approach, we compare the performance of many-body excited-state methods (equation-of-motion coupled-cluster and algebraic diagrammatic construction) and time-dependent density functional theory. The selected examples illustrate the utility of different exciton descriptors in assigning state character and explaining the discrepancies among different methods. The examples include Rydberg, valence, and charge-transfer states, as well as delocalized excitonic states in large conjugated systems and states with substantial doubly excited character.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Density-Functional Theory for Time-Dependent Systems
Runge, E., & Gross, E. K. U. (1984) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.52.997 · Cited by 8,914
Grabowski, Z. R., Rotkiewicz, K., & Rettig, W. (2003) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr940745l · Cited by 3,714
Molecular Electronic‐Structure Theory
Helgaker, T., Jørgensen, P., & Olsen, J. (2000) · doi:10.1002/9781119019572 · Cited by 2,594
Cited by
OpenMolcas: From Source Code to Insight
Fdez. Galván, I., Vacher, M., Alavi, A., Angeli, C., Aquilante, F., Autschbach, J., Bao, J. J., Bokarev, S. I., Bogdanov, N. A., Carlson, R. K., et al. (2019) · Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation · doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.9b00532 · Cited by 1,114
Self-citationDye-sensitized solar cells strike back
Muñoz-García, A. B., Benesperi, I., Boschloo, G., Concepcion, J. J., Delcamp, J. H., Gibson, E. A., Meyer, G. J., Pavone, M., Pettersson, H., Hagfeldt, A., et al. (2021) · Chemical Society Reviews · doi:10.1039/d0cs01336f · Cited by 544
Controlling the optical properties of carbon nanotubes with organic colour-centre quantum defects
Brozena, A. H., Kim, M., Powell, L. R., & Wang, Y. (2019) · Nature Reviews Chemistry · doi:10.1038/s41570-019-0103-5 · Cited by 207
Filho, A. H. D. S., & de Souza, G. L. C. (2020) · Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics · doi:10.1039/d0cp02445g · Cited by 43
Metadata
- Authors
- Mewes, S. A., Plasser, F., Krylov, A., & Dreuw, A.
- Venue
- Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2018-01-31
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 710-725
- ISSN
- 1549-9618 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-9626
- OpenAlex
- W2782686874
- Cited by
- 163
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 10.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
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.