4.4 Article

Two-step evaluation of binding energy and potential energy surface of van der Waals complexes

Journal

JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL CHEMISTRY
Volume 33, Issue 6, Pages 617-628

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jcc.21993

Keywords

van der Waals complexes; binding energy; potential energy surface; two-step evaluation method; aurophilic interaction

Funding

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Science, Sport and Technology [22000009]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [22000009] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Evaluation of intermolecular distance and binding energy (BE) of van der Waals complex/cluster at ab initio level of theory is computationally demanding when many monomers are involved. Starting from MP2 energy, we reached a two-step evaluation method of BE of van der Waals complex/cluster through reasonable approximations; $ {\rm BE} = {\rm BE(HF)} +\sum _{{{\rm M}{i}}>{{\rm M}j}}\{{\rm BE}_{{{\rm M}i}-{{\rm M}j}}({\rm MP2} \ {\rm or} \ {\rm MP}2.5)-{\rm BE}_{{{\rm M}i}-{{M}j}}({\rm HF})\} $ where HF represents the Hartree-Fock calculation, Mi, Mj, etc. are interacting monomers, and MP2.5 represents the arithmetic mean of MP2 and MP3. The first term is the usual BE of the complex/cluster evaluated at the HF level. The second term is the sum of the difference in two-body BE between the correlated and HF levels of theory. This equation was applied to various van der Waals complexes consisting of up-to-four monomers at MP2 and MP2.5 levels of theory. We found that this method is capable of providing precise estimate of the BE and reproducing well the potential energy surface of van der Waals complexes/clusters; the maximum error of the BE is less than 1 kcal/mol and 1% in most cases except for several limited cases. The origins of error in these cases are discussed in detail. (C) 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Comput Chem, 2012

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available