Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 472

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Density Functionals for Inorganometallic and Organometallic Chemistry

Schultz, Nathan E., Zhao, Yan, Truhlar, Donald G.·2005·The Journal of Physical Chemistry A

Abstract

We present a database of 21 bond dissociation energies for breaking metal-ligand bonds. The molecules in the metal-ligand bond energy database are AgH, CoH, CoO+, CoOH+, CrCH3+, CuOH2+, FeH, Fe(CO)5, FeO, FeS, LiCl, LiO, MgO, MnCH3NiCH2+, Ni(CO)4, RhC, VCO+, VO, and VS. We have also created databases of metal-ligand bond lengths and atomic ionization potentials. The molecules used for bond lengths are AgH, BeO, CoH, CoO+, FeH, FeO, FeS, LiCl, LiO, MgO, RhC, VO, and VS and the ionization potentials are for the following atoms: C, Co, Cr, Cu, Ni, O, and V. The data were chosen based on their diversity and expected reliability, and they are used along with three previously developed databases (transition metal dimer bond energies and bond lengths and main-group molecular atomization energies) for assessing the accuracy of several kinds of density functionals. In particular, we report tests for 42 previously defined functionals: 2 local spin density approximation (LSDA) functionals, 14 generalized gradient approximation (GGA) methods, 13 hybrid GGA methods, 7 meta GGA methods, and 8 hybrid meta GGA methods. In addition to these functionals, we also examine the effectiveness of scaling the correlation energy by testing 13 functionals with scaled or no gradient-corrected correlation energy, and we find that functionals of this kind are more accurate for metal-metal and metal-ligand bonds than any of the functionals already in the literature. We also present a readjusted GGA and a hybrid GGA with parameters adjusted for metals. When we consider these 57 functionals for metal-ligand and metal-metal bond energies simultaneously with main-group atomization energies, atomic ionization potentials, and bond lengths we find that the most accurate functional is G96LYP, followed closely by MPWLYP1M (new in this article), XLYP, BLYP, and MOHLYP (also new in this article). Four of these five functionals have no Hartree-Fock exchange, and the other has only 5%. As a byproduct of this work we introduce a convenient diagnostic, called the B1 diagnostic, for ascertaining the multireference character in a bond.

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/jp0539223

Cites

3 of 3 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

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 472

Metadata

Authors
Schultz, N. E., Zhao, Y., & Truhlar, D. G.
Venue
The Journal of Physical Chemistry A
Published
2005-11-16
Volume
109
Issue
49
Pages
11127-11143
ISSN
  • 1089-5639 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5215
OpenAlex
W2107254944
Cited by
472
References
3
FWCI
17.21
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: Density Functionals for Inorganometallic and Organometallic Chemistry. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/jp0539223
The paper
Schultz, N. E., Zhao, Y., & Truhlar, D. G. (2005). Density Functionals for Inorganometallic and Organometallic Chemistry. The Journal of Physical Chemistry A. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp0539223

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.