The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Fully self-consistent GW calculations for molecules
Open accessAbstract
We calculate single-particle excitation energies for a series of 34 molecules using fully self-consistent GW, one-shot ${\text{G}}_{0}{\text{W}}_{0}$, Hartree-Fock (HF), and hybrid density-functional theory (DFT). All calculations are performed within the projector-augmented wave method using a basis set of Wannier functions augmented by numerical atomic orbitals. The GW self-energy is calculated on the real frequency axis including its full frequency dependence and off-diagonal matrix elements. The mean absolute error of the ionization potential (IP) with respect to experiment is found to be 4.4, 2.6, 0.8, 0.4, and 0.5 eV for DFT-PBE, DFT-PBE0, HF, ${\text{G}}_{0}{\text{W}}_{0}[\text{HF}]$, and self-consistent GW, respectively. This shows that although electronic screening is weak in molecular systems, its inclusion at the GW level reduces the error in the IP by up to 50% relative to unscreened HF. In general GW overscreens the HF energies leading to underestimation of the IPs. The best IPs are obtained from one-shot ${\text{G}}_{0}{\text{W}}_{0}$ calculations based on HF since this reduces the overscreening. Finally, we find that the inclusion of core-valence exchange is important and can affect the excitation energies by as much as 1 eV.
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
Density-functional thermochemistry. III. The role of exact exchange
Becke, A. D. (1993) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/1.464913 · Cited by 103,767
Lee, C., Yang, W., & Parr, R. G. (1988) · Physical Review B · doi:10.1103/physrevb.37.785 · Cited by 100,874
Self-interaction correction to density-functional approximations for many-electron systems
Perdew, J. P., & Zunger, A. (1981) · Physical Review B · doi:10.1103/physrevb.23.5048 · Cited by 20,887
Electronic excitations: density-functional versus many-body Green’s-function approaches
Onida, G., Reining, L., & Rubio, A. (2002) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.74.601 · Cited by 4,155
Cited by
Blase, X., Attaccalite, C., & Olevano, V. (2011) · Physical Review B · doi:10.1103/physrevb.83.115103 · Cited by 448
The Relation between Structure and Quantum Interference in Single Molecule Junctions
Markussen, T., Stadler, R., & Thygesen, K. S. (2010) · Nano Letters · doi:10.1021/nl101688a · Cited by 349
Self-citationThe GW-Method for Quantum Chemistry Applications: Theory and Implementation
van Setten, M. J., Weigend, F., & Evers, F. (2013) · Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation · doi:10.1021/ct300648t · Cited by 284
Combining Wave Function Methods with Density Functional Theory for Excited States
Ghosh, S., Verma, P., Cramer, C. J., Gagliardi, L., & Truhlar, D. G. (2018) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.8b00193 · Cited by 253
Metadata
- Authors
- Rostgaard, C., Jacobsen, K. W., & Thygesen, K. S.
- Venue
- Physical Review B
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 2010-02-03
- Volume
- 81
- Issue
- 8
- ISSN
- 1098-0121 (ISSN-L)
- 1550-235X
- OpenAlex
- W1998254538
- Cited by
- 282
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 11.89
- 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: Fully self-consistent GW calculations for molecules. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1103/physrevb.81.085103
- The paper
- Rostgaard, C., Jacobsen, K. W., & Thygesen, K. S. (2010). Fully self-consistent GW calculations for molecules. Physical Review B. https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevb.81.085103
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.