4.7 Article

Comparison of multireference ab initio wavefunction methodologies for X- ray absorption edges: A case study on [Fe(II/III)Cl4]2-/1- molecules

Journal

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS
Volume 150, Issue 10, Pages -

Publisher

AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1063/1.5051613

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Max Planck Society
  2. NSERC

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this work, we present a detailed comparison of wavefunction-based multireference (MR)techniques for the prediction of transition metal L-edge X-ray absorption spectroscopy (XAS)using [Fe(II)Cl-4](2-) and [Fe(III)Cl-4](1-) complexes as prototypical test cases. We focus on the comparison of MR Configuration Interaction (MRCI)and MR Equation of Motion Coupled Cluster (MREOM-CC) methods, which are employed to calculate valence excitation as well as core to valence Fe L-edge XAS spectra of [Fe(II)Cl-4](2-) and [Fe(III)Cl-4](1-) complexes. The two investigated approaches are thoroughly analyzed with respect to their information content regarding (1)metal-ligand covalency, (2)ligand field splittings, (3)relativistic effects, (4)electron correlation, (5)energy distribution, and (6)intensity modulation of the experimentally observed spectral features. It is shown that at the level of MRCI calculations in both [Fe(II)Cl-4](2-) and [Fe(III)Cl-4](1-) cases, very good agreement with the experimental Fe L-edge XAS spectra is obtained provided that the employed active space is extended to include ligand-based orbitals in addition to metal-based molecular orbitals. It is shown that this is necessary in order to correctly describe the important sigma and pi Fe-Cl covalent interactions. By contrast, MREOM-CC calculations yield excellent agreement relative to experiment even with small active spaces. The efficiency of the employed MR computational protocols is thoroughly discussed. Overall, we believe that this study serves as an important reference for future developments and applications of MR methods in the field of X-Ray spectroscopy.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available