Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 274

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Unrestricted Coupled Cluster and Brueckner Doubles Variations of W1 Theory

Barnes, Ericka C., Petersson, George A., Montgomery, John A., Frisch, Michael J., Martin, Jan M. L.·2009·Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
DOI 10.1021/ct900260g
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Unrestricted coupled cluster spin contamination corrected [UCCSD(T)] and unrestricted Brueckner doubles [UBD(T)] variations of the Weizmann-1 theory (W1), denoted as W1U, W1Usc, and W1BD, respectively, are compared with the restricted open-shell W1 theory [W1(RO)]. The performances of the four W1 variants are assessed with 220 total atomization energies, electron affinities, ionization potentials, and proton affinities in the G2/97 test set, for consistency with the error analysis of the original W1(RO) study. The root-mean-square deviations from the experiment of W1U (0.65 ± 0.48 kcal/mol), W1Usc (0.57 ± 0.48 kcal/mol), W1BD (0.62 ± 0.48 kcal/mol), and W1(RO) (0.57 ± 0.48 kcal/mol) show that the four methods are virtually indistinguishable. This error analysis excludes the "singlet biradicals," C2 and O3, since single determinantal methods are not really adequate for these strongly multireference systems. The unrestricted W1 variants perform poorly for such highly spin-contaminated and multireference species (the largest deviation from experiment for W1Usc is -4.2 ± 0.1 kcal/mol for the O3 EA). W1(RO) performs much better than its unrestricted counterparts for these pathological cases (the deviation from experiment is reduced to -1.5 ± 0.1 kcal/mol for the O3 EA), though the errors are significantly larger than those for the overall test set. The examples of C2, O3, and the F2 potential energy curve indicate that an advantage to using W1BD is that the error in ⟨S(2)⟩ correlates with the magnitude of the error in energy, whereas W1(RO) loses accuracy without such a warning.

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/ct900260g

Cites

50 of 50 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

Cites

Cited by

See all 274

Metadata

Authors
Barnes, E. C., Petersson, G. A., Montgomery, J. A., Frisch, M. J., & Martin, J. M. L.
Venue
Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
Publisher
American Chemical Society (ACS)
Published
2009-08-31
Volume
5
Issue
10
Pages
2687-2693
ISSN
  • 1549-9618 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-9626
DOI
10.1021/ct900260g
OpenAlex
W1966435513
Cited by
274
References
50
FWCI
5.58
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.