Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 206

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Exchange and correlation energy in density functional theory: Comparison of accurate density functional theory quantities with traditional Hartree–Fock based ones and generalized gradient approximations for the molecules Li2, N2, F2

Open access
Gritsenko, O. V., Schipper, P. R. T., Baerends, E. J.·1997·The Journal of Chemical Physics

Abstract

The density functional definition of exchange and correlation differs from the traditional one. In order to calculate the density functional theory (DFT), quantities accurately, molecular Kohn–Sham (KS) solutions have been obtained from ab initio wave functions for the homonuclear diatomic molecules Li2, N2, F2. These afford the construction of the KS determinant Ψs and the calculation of its total electronic energy EKS and the kinetic, nuclear-attraction and Coulomb repulsion components Ts, V, WH as well as the (DFT) exchange energy Ex and correlation energy Ec. Comparison of these DFT quantities has been made on one hand with the corresponding Hartree–Fock (HF) quantities and on the other hand with local density approximation (LDA) and generalized gradient approximation (GGA). Comparison with HF shows that the correlation errors in the components T, V, and WH of the total energy are much larger for HF than KS determinantal wave functions. However, the total energies EKS and EHF appear to be close to each other, as well as the exchange energies Ex and ExHF and correlation energies Ec and EcHF. The KS determinantal wave function and the KS orbitals therefore correspond to much improved kinetic and Coulombic energies, while having only a slightly larger total correlation energy. It is stressed that these properties of the Kohn–Sham orbitals make them very suitable for use in the molecular orbital theories of chemistry. Comparison of the accurate Kohn–Sham exchange and correlation energies with LDA and GGA shows that the GGA exchange energies are consistently too negative, while the GGA correlation energies are not negative enough. It is argued that the GGA exchange functionals represent effectively not only exchange, but also the molecular non-dynamical correlation, while the GGA correlation functionals represent dynamical correlation only.

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 · 10.1063/1.474864

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.

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

Cited by

See all 206

Metadata

Authors
Gritsenko, O. V., Schipper, P. R. T., & Baerends, E. J.
Venue
The Journal of Chemical Physics
Published
1997-10-01
Volume
107
Issue
13
Pages
5007-5015
ISSN
  • 0021-9606 (ISSN-L)
  • 1089-7690
OpenAlex
W1600920748
Cited by
206
References
0
FWCI
4.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Exchange and correlation energy in density functional theory: Comparison of accurate density functional theory quantities with traditional Hartree–Fock based ones and generalized gradient approximations for the molecules Li2, N2, F2. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1063/1.474864
The paper
Gritsenko, O. V., Schipper, P. R. T., & Baerends, E. J. (1997). Exchange and correlation energy in density functional theory: Comparison of accurate density functional theory quantities with traditional Hartree–Fock based ones and generalized gradient approximations for the molecules Li2, N2, F2. The Journal of Chemical Physics. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.474864

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.