The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
TD-DFT Performance for the Visible Absorption Spectra of Organic Dyes: Conventional versus Long-Range Hybrids
Abstract
The π → π* transitions of more than 100 organic dyes from the major classes of chromophores (quinones, diazo, ...) have been investigated using a Time-Dependent Density Functional Theory (TD-DFT) procedure relying on large atomic basis sets and the systematic modeling of solvent effects. These calculations have been performed with pure (PBE) as well as conventional (PBE0) and long-range (LR) corrected hybrid functionals (LC-PBE, LC-ωPBE, and CAM-B3LYP). The computed wavelengths are systematically guided by the percentage of exact exchange included at intermediate interelectronic distance, i.e., the λmax value always follows the PBE > PBE0 > CAM-B3LYP > LC-PBE > LC-ωPBE > HF sequence. The functional giving the best estimates of the experimental transition energies may vary, but PBE0 and CAM-B3LYP tend to outperform all other approaches. The latter functional is shown to be especially adequate to treat molecules with delocalized excited states. The mean absolute error provided by PBE0 is 22 nm (0.14 eV) with no deviation exceeding 100 nm (0.50 eV): PBE0 is able to deliver reasonable estimates of the color of most organic dyes of practical or industrial interest. By using a calibration curve, we found that the LR functionals systematically allow an even more consistent description of the low-lying excited-state energies than the conventional hybrids. Indeed, linearly corrected LR approaches yield an average error of 10 nm for each dye family. Therefore, when such statistical treatments can be designed for given sets of dyes, a simple and rapid theoretical procedure allows both a chemically sound and a numerically accurate description of the absorption wavelengths.
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
Generalized Gradient Approximation Made Simple
Perdew, J. P., Burke, K., & Ernzerhof, M. (1996) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.77.3865 · Cited by 215,824
Cited by
Laurent, A. D., & Jacquemin, D. (2013) · International Journal of Quantum Chemistry · doi:10.1002/qua.24438 · Cited by 1,382
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
Progress and Challenges in the Calculation of Electronic Excited States
González, L., Escudero, D., & Serrano‐Andrés, L. (2012) · ChemPhysChem · doi:10.1002/cphc.201100200 · Cited by 429
Dye chemistry with time-dependent density functional theory
Laurent, A. D., Adamo, C., & Jacquemin, D. (2014) · Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. · doi:10.1039/c3cp55336a · Cited by 398
Self-citationInfluence of Triplet Instabilities in TDDFT
Peach, M. J. G., Williamson, M. J., & Tozer, D. J. (2011) · Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation · doi:10.1021/ct200651r · Cited by 384
Metadata
- Authors
- Jacquemin, D., Perpète, E. A., Scuseria, G. E., Ciofini, I., & Adamo, C.
- Venue
- Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2007-11-17
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 123-135
- ISSN
- 1549-9618 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-9626
- OpenAlex
- W2028751304
- Cited by
- 879
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 24.04
- 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
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.