The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Tests of second-generation and third-generation density functionals for thermochemical kineticsElectronic supplementary information (ESI) available: Mean errors for pure and hybrid DFT methods. See http://www.rsc.org/suppdata/cp/b3/b316260e/
Abstract
We report tests of second- and third-generation density functionals, for pure density functional theory (DFT) and hybrid DFT, against the BH6 representative barrier height database and the AE6 representative atomization energy database, with augmented, polarized double and triple zeta basis sets. The pure DFT methods tested are G96LYP, BB95, PBE, mPWPW91, VSXC, HCTH, OLYP, and OPW91 and the hybrid DFT methods tested are B1B95, PBE0, mPW1PW91, B97-1, B98, MPW1K, B97-2, and O3LYP. The performance of these methods is tested against each other as well as against first-generation methods (BP86, BLYP, PW91, B3PW91, and B3LYP). We conclude that the overall performance of the second-generation DFT methods is considerably better than the first-generation methods. The MPW1K method is very good for barrier height calculations, and none of the pure DFT methods outperforms any of the hybrid DFT methods for kinetics. The B1B95, VSXC, B98, OLYP and O3LYP methods perform best for atomization energies. Using a mean mean unsigned error criterion (MMUE) that involves two sizes of basis sets (both with polarization and diffuse functions) and averages mean unsigned errors in barrier heights and in atomization energy per bond, we find that VSXC has the best performance among pure functionals, and B97-2, MPW1K, and B1B95 have the best performance of all hybrid functionals tested.
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
Lee, C., Yang, W., & Parr, R. G. (1988) · Physical Review B · doi:10.1103/physrevb.37.785 · Cited by 100,874
Cited by
Huang, B., & von Lilienfeld, O. A. (2016) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/1.4964627 · Cited by 294
Computational Study on the Attack of .OH Radicals on Aromatic Amino Acids
Mujika, J. I., Uranga, J., & Matxain, J. M. (2013) · Chemistry – A European Journal · doi:10.1002/chem.201203862 · Cited by 45
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhao, Y., Pu, J., Lynch, B. J., & Truhlar, D. G.
- Venue
- Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics
- Publisher
- Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
- Published
- 2004
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 673
- ISSN
- 1463-9076 (ISSN-L)
- 1463-9084
- OpenAlex
- W2107416467
- Cited by
- 270
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 12.90
- 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: Tests of second-generation and third-generation density functionals for thermochemical kineticsElectronic supplementary information (ESI) available: Mean errors for pure and hybrid DFT methods. See http://www.rsc.org/suppdata/cp/b3/b316260e/. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1039/b316260e
- The paper
- Zhao, Y., Pu, J., Lynch, B. J., & Truhlar, D. G. (2004). Tests of second-generation and third-generation density functionals for thermochemical kineticsElectronic supplementary information (ESI) available: Mean errors for pure and hybrid DFT methods. See http://www.rsc.org/suppdata/cp/b3/b316260e/. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics. https://doi.org/10.1039/b316260e
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.