Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 348

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

Critical Assessment of the Performance of Density Functional Methods for Several Atomic and Molecular Properties

Open access
Riley, Kevin E., Op't Holt, Bryan T., Merz, Kenneth M.·2007·Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation

Abstract

The reliable prediction of molecular properties is a vital task of computational chemistry. In recent years, density functional theory (DFT) has become a popular method for calculating molecular properties for a vast array of systems varying in size from small organic molecules to large biological compounds such as proteins. In this work we assess the ability of many DFT methods to accurately determine atomic and molecular properties for small molecules containing elements commonly found in proteins, DNA, and RNA. These properties include bond lengths, bond angles, ground state vibrational frequencies, electron affinities, ionization potentials, heats of formation, hydrogen bond interaction energies, conformational energies, and reaction barrier heights. Calculations are carried out with the 3-21G*, 6-31G*, 3-21+G*, 6-31+G*, 6-31++G*, cc-pVxZ, and aug-cc-pVxZ (x=D,T) basis sets, while bond distance and bond angle calculations are also done using the cc-pVQZ and aug-cc-pVQZ basis sets. Members of the popular functional classes, namely, LSDA, GGA, meta-GGA, hybrid-GGA, and hybrid-meta-GGA, are considered in this work. For the purpose of comparison, Hartree-Fock (HF) and second order many-body perturbation (MP2) methods are also assessed in terms of their ability to determine these physical properties. Ultimately, it is observed that the split valence bases of the 6-31G variety provide accuracies similar to those of the more computationally expensive Dunning type basis sets. Another conclusion from this survey is that the hybrid-meta-GGA functionals are typically among the most accurate functionals for all of the properties examined in this work.

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 · 10.1021/ct600185a

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

Cited by

See all 348

Metadata

Authors
Riley, K. E., Op't Holt, B. T., & Merz, K. M.
Venue
Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
Published
2007-01-20
Volume
3
Issue
2
Pages
407-433
ISSN
  • 1549-9618 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-9626
OpenAlex
W2052099987
Cited by
348
References
1
FWCI
17.72
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

How to cite

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

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Critical Assessment of the Performance of Density Functional Methods for Several Atomic and Molecular Properties. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/ct600185a
The paper
Riley, K. E., Op't Holt, B. T., & Merz, K. M. (2007). Critical Assessment of the Performance of Density Functional Methods for Several Atomic and Molecular Properties. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation. https://doi.org/10.1021/ct600185a

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.