The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Gaussian basis sets of quadruple zeta valence quality for atoms H–Kr
Abstract
We present Gaussian basis sets of quadruple zeta valence quality with a segmented contraction scheme for atoms H to Kr. This extends earlier work on segmented contracted split valence (SV) and triple zeta valence (TZV) basis sets. Contraction coefficients and orbital exponents are fully optimized in atomic Hartree–Fock (HF) calculations. As opposed to other quadruple zeta basis sets, the basis set errors in atomic ground-state HF energies are less than 1 mEh and increase smoothly across the Periodic Table, while the number of primitives is comparably small. Polarization functions are taken partly from previous work, partly optimized in atomic MP2 calculations, and for a few cases determined at the HF level for excited atomic states nearly degenerate with the ground state. This leads to basis sets denoted QZVP for HF and density functional theory (DFT) calculations, and for some atoms to a larger basis recommended for correlated treatments, QZVPP. We assess the performance of the basis sets in molecular HF, DFT, and MP2 calculations for a sample of diatomic and small polyatomic molecules by a comparison of energies, bond lengths, and dipole moments with results obtained numerically or using very large basis sets. It is shown that basis sets of quadruple zeta quality are necessary to achieve an accuracy of 1 kcal/mol per bond in HF and DFT atomization energies. For compounds containing third row as well as alkaline and earth alkaline metals it is demonstrated that the inclusion of high-lying core orbitals in the active space can be necessary for accurate correlated treatments. The QZVPP basis sets provide sufficient flexibility to polarize the core in those cases. All test calculations indicate that the new basis sets lead to consistent accuracies in HF, DFT, or correlated treatments even in critical cases where other basis sets may show deficiencies.
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
Self-consistent molecular orbital methods. XX. A basis set for correlated wave functions
Krishnan, R., Binkley, J. S., Seeger, R., & Pople, J. A. (1980) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/1.438955 · Cited by 17,772
Cited by
Grimme, S., Antony, J., Ehrlich, S., & Krieg, H. (2010) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/1.3382344 · Cited by 59,686
Effect of the damping function in dispersion corrected density functional theory
Grimme, S., Ehrlich, S., & Goerigk, L. (2011) · Journal of Computational Chemistry · doi:10.1002/jcc.21759 · Cited by 28,221
Minimally augmented Karlsruhe basis sets
Zheng, J., Xu, X., & Truhlar, D. G. (2011) · Theoretical Chemistry Accounts · doi:10.1007/s00214-010-0846-z · Cited by 1,067
Huber, P., Studt, F., & Plessow, P. N. (2022) · The Journal of Physical Chemistry C · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.2c00668 · Cited by 39
Metadata
- Authors
- Weigend, F., Furche, F., & Ahlrichs, R.
- Venue
- The Journal of Chemical Physics
- Publisher
- AIP Publishing
- Published
- 2003-12-22
- Volume
- 119
- Issue
- 24
- Pages
- 12753-12762
- ISSN
- 0021-9606 (ISSN-L)
- 1089-7690
- OpenAlex
- W1978849007
- Cited by
- 1,204
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 8.86
- 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.