4.6 Article

Enabling Efficient and Accurate Computational Studies of MOF Reactivity via QM/MM and QM/QM Methods

Journal

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY C
Volume 124, Issue 19, Pages 10550-10560

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.0c01220

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Center for Understanding and Control of Acid Gas-Induced Evolution of Materials for Energy (UNCAGE-ME), an Energy Frontier Research Center - U.S. Department of Energy (US DOE), Office of Science, Basic Energy Sciences (BES) [DE-SC0012577]
  2. National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC), a U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science User Facility [DE-AC02-05CH11231]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Electronic structure calculations can provide unique insight into metal-organic framework (MOF) reactivity and defect formation. Such calculations can be broadly categorized as utilizing either periodic or cluster models, each with their respective advantages and disadvantages. In the present work, we demonstrate how multiscale methods can leverage the advantages of both approaches to enable high levels of accuracy and computational efficiency in studies of MOF reactivity. Using defect formation in a zeolitic imidazolate framework (ZIF) as a prototypical example, we benchmark a quantum mechanics/molecular mechanics (QM/ MM) scheme that enables highly efficient cluster-based calculations on MOFs. We demonstrate the importance of correctly accounting for the influence of both dative bond cleavage in the QM cluster and long-range mechanical coupling to the bulk to achieving accurate QM/MM studies of MOFs. We subsequently leverage these cluster models in a QM/QM scheme that goes beyond standard DFT to yield gold-standard correlated wave function results on MOFs at modest computational cost. Crucially, we find several cases in which the incorporation of these correlated corrections yields qualitatively important corrections over conventional DFT values.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available