4.7 Article

Accurate ab initio and hybrid potential energy surfaces, intramolecular vibrational energies, and classical ir spectrum of the water dimer

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS
卷 130, 期 14, 页码 -

出版社

AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1063/1.3112403

关键词

ab initio calculations; benchmark testing; diffusion; dissociation energies; intramolecular forces; molecular dynamics method; molecular moments; Monte Carlo methods; potential energy surfaces; vibrational states; water

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [CHE-0446527]
  2. Office of Naval Research [N00014-05-1-0460]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We report three modifications to recent ab initio, full-dimensional potential energy surfaces (PESs) for the water dimer [X. Huang , J. Chem. Phys. 128, 034312 (2008)]. The first modification is a refit of ab initio electronic energies to produce an accurate dissociation energy D(e). The second modification adds replacing the water monomer component of the PES with a spectroscopically accurate one and the third modification produces a hybrid potential that goes smoothly in the asymptotic region to the flexible, Thole-type model potential, version 3 dimer potential (denoted TTM3-F) [G. S. Fanourgakis and S. S. Xantheas, J. Chem. Phys. 128, 074506 (2008)]. The rigorous D(0) for these PESs, obtained using diffusion Monte Carlo calculations of the dimer zero-point energy, and an accurate zero-point energy of the monomer, range from 12.5 to 13.2 kJ/mol (2.99-3.15 kcal/mol), with the latter being the suggested benchmark value. For TTM3-F D(0) equals 16.1 kJ/mol. Vibrational calculations of monomer fundamental energies using the code MULTIMODE are reported for these PESs and the TTM3-F PES and compared to experiment. A classical molecular dynamics simulation of the infrared spectra of the water dimer and deuterated water dimer at 300 K are also reported using the ab initio dipole moment surface reported previously [X. Huang, B. J. Braams, and J. M. Bowman, J. Phys. Chem. A 110, 445 (2006)].

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据