The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
How Accurate Is Density Functional Theory at Predicting Dipole Moments? An Assessment Using a New Database of 200 Benchmark Values
Open accessAbstract
Dipole moments are a simple, global measure of the accuracy of the electron density of a polar molecule. Dipole moments also affect the interactions of a molecule with other molecules as well as electric fields. To directly assess the accuracy of modern density functionals for calculating dipole moments, we have developed a database of 200 benchmark dipole moments, using coupled cluster theory through triple excitations, extrapolated to the complete basis set limit. This new database is used to assess the performance of 88 popular or recently developed density functionals. The results suggest that double hybrid functionals perform the best, yielding dipole moments within about 3.6-4.5% regularized RMS error versus the reference values-which is not very different from the 4% regularized RMS error produced by coupled cluster singles and doubles. Many hybrid functionals also perform quite well, generating regularized RMS errors in the 5-6% range. Some functionals, however, exhibit large outliers, and local functionals in general perform less well than hybrids or double hybrids.
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 thermochemistry. III. The role of exact exchange
Becke, A. D. (1993) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/1.464913 · Cited by 103,767
Lee, C., Yang, W., & Parr, R. G. (1988) · Physical Review B · doi:10.1103/physrevb.37.785 · Cited by 100,874
Self-interaction correction to density-functional approximations for many-electron systems
Perdew, J. P., & Zunger, A. (1981) · Physical Review B · doi:10.1103/physrevb.23.5048 · Cited by 20,887
Long-range corrected hybrid density functionals with damped atom–atom dispersion corrections
Chai, J.-D., & Head-Gordon, M. (2008) · Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics · doi:10.1039/b810189b · Cited by 14,648
Self-citationMardirossian, N., & Head-Gordon, M. (2017) · Molecular Physics · doi:10.1080/00268976.2017.1333644 · Cited by 2,307
Self-citationCurrent Status of the AMOEBA Polarizable Force Field
Ponder, J. W., Wu, C., Ren, P., Pande, V. S., Chodera, J. D., Schnieders, M. J., Haque, I., Mobley, D. L., Lambrecht, D. S., DiStasio, R. A., et al. (2010) · The Journal of Physical Chemistry B · doi:10.1021/jp910674d · Cited by 1,440
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Hait, D., & Head-Gordon, M.
- Venue
- Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2018-03-21
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1969-1981
- ISSN
- 1549-9618 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-9626
- OpenAlex
- W2755159604
- Cited by
- 286
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 13.09
- 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.