2018
DOI: 10.26434/chemrxiv.7381943.v1
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessment of Density Functional Theory in Predicting Interaction Energies Between Water and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons: From Water on Benzene to Water on Graphene

Abstract: <div> <div> <div> <p>The interaction of water with polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, from benzene to graphene, is investigated using various exchange-correlation functionals selected across generalized gradient approximation (GGA), meta-GGA, and hybrid families within the density functional theory (DFT) hierarchy. The accuracy of the different functionals is assessed through comparisons with high-level electronic structure methods, including random phase approximation (RPA),… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

1
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The present results raise the question whether the perturbative triples correction of CCSD(T) inherits any of the limitations of MBPT, even though it includes some screening at the level of the amplitudes. Whereas CCSD(T) errors for interaction energies of small molecular complexes were determined to be on the order of 1%, 68 and typical deviations between RPA and CCSD(T) binding energies are on the order of 5-10% for the benchmarks studied here, the linear scaling domain-based pair natural orbital CCSD(T) binding energies for water on small graphene flakes are significantly larger than the corresponding RPA and diffusion Monte Carlo ones, 133 and the CCSD(T) perturbative triples correction diverges for the correlation energy of the uniform electron gas. 134 The AC-SAPT formalism developed here affords separate, non-perturbative definitions of dispersion and induction effects in NIs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 72%
“…The present results raise the question whether the perturbative triples correction of CCSD(T) inherits any of the limitations of MBPT, even though it includes some screening at the level of the amplitudes. Whereas CCSD(T) errors for interaction energies of small molecular complexes were determined to be on the order of 1%, 68 and typical deviations between RPA and CCSD(T) binding energies are on the order of 5-10% for the benchmarks studied here, the linear scaling domain-based pair natural orbital CCSD(T) binding energies for water on small graphene flakes are significantly larger than the corresponding RPA and diffusion Monte Carlo ones, 133 and the CCSD(T) perturbative triples correction diverges for the correlation energy of the uniform electron gas. 134 The AC-SAPT formalism developed here affords separate, non-perturbative definitions of dispersion and induction effects in NIs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 72%