The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Geometries of Third-Row Transition-Metal Complexes from Density-Functional Theory
Abstract
A set of 41 metal-ligand bond distances in 25 third-row transition-metal complexes, for which precise structural data are known in the gas phase, is used to assess optimized and zero-point averaged geometries obtained from DFT computations with various exchange-correlation functionals and basis sets. For a given functional (except LSDA) Stuttgart-type quasi-relativistic effective core potentials and an all-electron scalar relativistic approach (ZORA) tend to produce very similar geometries. In contrast to the lighter congeners, LSDA affords reasonably accurate geometries of 5d-metal complexes, as it is among the functionals with the lowest mean and standard deviations from experiment. For this set the ranking of some other popular density functionals, ordered according to decreasing standard deviation, is BLYP > VSXC > BP86 ≈ BPW91 ≈ TPSS ≈ B3LYP ≈ PBE > TPSSh > B3PW91 ≈ B3P86 ≈ PBE hybrid. In this case hybrid functionals are superior to their nonhybrid variants. In addition, we have reinvestigated the previous test sets for 3d- (Bühl M.; Kabrede, H. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2006, 2, 1282-1290) and 4d- (Waller, M. P.; Bühl, M. J. Comput. Chem. 2007, 28, 1531-1537) transition-metal complexes using all-electron scalar relativistic DFT calculations in addition to the published nonrelativistic and ECP results. For this combined test set comprising first-, second-, and third-row metal complexes, B3P86 and PBE hybrid are indicated to perform best. A remarkably consistent standard deviation of around 2 pm in metal-ligand bond distances is achieved over the entire set of d-block elements.
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
Cited by
Neese, F. (2012) · WIREs Computational Molecular Science · doi:10.1002/wcms.81 · Cited by 13,466
Self-citationDensity functional theory for transition metals and transition metal chemistry
Cramer, C. J., & Truhlar, D. G. (2009) · Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics · doi:10.1039/b907148b · Cited by 1,648
High-performance light-emitting diodes based on carbene-metal-amides
Di, D., Romanov, A. S., Yang, L., Richter, J. M., Rivett, J., Jones, S. T. E., Thomas, T., Abdi Jalebi, M., Friend, R. H., Linnolahti, M., et al. (2017) · Apollo (University of Cambridge) · doi:10.17863/cam.10961 · Cited by 549
Nandy, A., Duan, C., Taylor, M. G., Liu, F., Steeves, A. H., & Kulik, H. J. (2021) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.1c00347 · Cited by 358
Atanasov, M., Aravena, D., Suturina, E., Bill, E., Maganas, D., & Neese, F. (2015) · Coordination Chemistry Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.ccr.2014.10.015 · Cited by 358
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Bühl, M., Reimann, C., Pantazis, D. A., Bredow, T., & Neese, F.
- Venue
- Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2008-08-22
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1449-1459
- ISSN
- 1549-9618 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-9626
- OpenAlex
- W1963818903
- Cited by
- 525
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 23.98
- 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.