“…F I G U R E 3 CBS-estimated RMS deviations of (a) carbon and (b) proton isotropic shieldings from the empirical values in methane as a function of the method number (given in the abscissa axis): VXSC (1), HCTH (2), HCTH97 (3), HCTH147 (4), THCTH (5), M06L (6), B97D (7), B3LYP (8), B3P86 (9), B3PW91 (10), B1B95 (11), MPW1PW91 (12), MPW1LYP (13), MPW1PBE (14), MPW3PBE (15), B98 (16), B971 (17), B972 (18), PBE1PBE (19), B1LYP (20), O3LYP (21), BhandH (22), BHandHLYP (23), BMK (24), M06 (25), M06HF (26), M062X (27), tHCTHhyb (28), HSEh1PBE (29), HSE2PBE (30), PBEh1PBE (31), wB97XD (32), wB97 (33), wB97X (34), TPSSh (35), X3LYP (36), LC-wPBE (37), CAM-B3LYP (38), WP04 (39), RHF (40), MP2 (41), KT1 (42), KT2 (43), KT3 (44), SOPPA (45), SOPPA (CCSD) (46), and CCSD(T) (47). Reproduced from Kupka, et al [88] with the permission of the American Chemical Society Much later, Kupka, et al [88] performed a systematic study of the performance of about four dozens of different DFT functionals together with five pure nonempirical methods, RHF, MP2, SOPPA, SOPPA (CCSD), and CCSD(T), for predicting 1 H and 13 C NMR chemical shifts of six small molecules, NH 3 , CH 4 , C 2 H 2 , C 2 H 4 , C 2 H 6 , and C 6 H 6 , with using Jensen's pcS-n (n = 1-4) basis set.…”