The DOI matches its Crossref record.
How Well Can Hybrid Density Functional Methods Predict Transition State Geometries and Barrier Heights?
Abstract
We compare hybrid Hartree−Fock density-functional theory to ab initio approaches for locating saddle point geometries and calculating barrier heights on a Born−Oppenhiemer potential energy surface. We located reactant, product, and saddle point stationary points for 22 reactions by the MP2 and QCISD ab initio methods and the B3LYP, BH&HLYP, mPW1PW91, and MPW1K hybrid Hartree−Fock DFT methods. We examined all of these methods with two basis sets, 6-31+G(d,p) and MG3. By comparison to calculations on five systems where the saddle point has been optimized at a high level of theory, we determined that the best saddle point geometries were obtained using the MPW1K and QCISD levels of theory. Of the methods tested, mPW1PW91 and B3LYP are the least effective for determining saddle point geometries and have mean unsigned error in barrier heights of 3.4−4.2 kcal/mol, depending on the basis set. In contrast, the MPW1K level of theory predicts the most accurate saddle point geometries and has a mean unsigned error of only 1.5 kcal/mol for either basis set. For even better accuracy, the combination of MPW1K/6-31+G(d,p) geometry calculations with QCISD(T)/MG3 or CCSD(T)/MG3 single-point energy calculations is shown to have an excellent performance-to-cost ratio. As a side product of this work, we report optimized scale factors for computing zero point energies by MPW1K.
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
Cited by
An Evaluation of Harmonic Vibrational Frequency Scale Factors
Merrick, J. P., Moran, D., & Radom, L. (2007) · The Journal of Physical Chemistry A · doi:10.1021/jp073974n · Cited by 2,735
Modelling proton tunnelling in the adenine–thymine base pair
Godbeer, A. D., Al-Khalili, J. S., & Stevenson, P. D. (2015) · Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics · doi:10.1039/c5cp00472a · Cited by 78
Theoretical studies on the reactions of CHF2CF2OCH3/CH2FCF2OCH3 with OH radicals
Wang, L., Zhao, J., He, H., & Zhang, J. (2013) · Journal of Fluorine Chemistry · doi:10.1016/j.jfluchem.2013.02.015 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Lynch, B. J., & Truhlar, D. G.
- Venue
- The Journal of Physical Chemistry A
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2001-03-13
- Volume
- 105
- Issue
- 13
- Pages
- 2936-2941
- ISSN
- 1089-5639 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5215
- OpenAlex
- W1979850841
- Cited by
- 582
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 29.00
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: How Well Can Hybrid Density Functional Methods Predict Transition State Geometries and Barrier Heights? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/jp004262z
- The paper
- Lynch, B. J., & Truhlar, D. G. (2001). How Well Can Hybrid Density Functional Methods Predict Transition State Geometries and Barrier Heights? The Journal of Physical Chemistry A. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp004262z
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.