4.7 Article

Kinetically constrained ring-polymer molecular dynamics for non-adiabatic chemical reactions

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS
卷 140, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

AIP Publishing
DOI: 10.1063/1.4863919

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation (NSF) CAREER Award [CHE-1057112]
  2. (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) [DE-SC0006598]
  3. Office of Naval Research (ONR) [N00014-10-1-0884]
  4. Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation New Faculty Award
  5. Alfred P. Sloan Foundation Research Fellowship
  6. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) [DE-SC0006598] Funding Source: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
  7. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  8. Division Of Chemistry [1057112] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We extend ring-polymer molecular dynamics (RPMD) to allow for the direct simulation of general, electronically non-adiabatic chemical processes. The kinetically constrained (KC) RPMD method uses the imaginary-time path-integral representation in the set of nuclear coordinates and electronic states to provide continuous equations of motion that describe the quantized, electronically non-adiabatic dynamics of the system. KC-RPMD preserves the favorable properties of the usual RPMD formulation in the position representation, including rigorous detailed balance, time-reversal symmetry, and invariance of reaction rate calculations to the choice of dividing surface. However, the new method overcomes significant shortcomings of position-representation RPMD by enabling the description of non-adiabatic transitions between states associated with general, many-electron wave-functions and by accurately describing deep-tunneling processes across asymmetric barriers. We demonstrate that KC-RPMD yields excellent numerical results for a range of model systems, including a simple avoided-crossing reaction and condensed-phase electron-transfer reactions across multiple regimes for the electronic coupling and thermodynamic driving force. (C) 2014 AIP Publishing LLC.

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