4.6 Article

Correction to DFT interaction energies by an empirical dispersion term valid for a range of intermolecular distances

期刊

PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY CHEMICAL PHYSICS
卷 14, 期 10, 页码 3414-3424

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c2cp23673g

关键词

-

资金

  1. NSF [CHE-0349189]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The computation of intermolecular interaction energies via commonly used density functionals is hindered by their inaccurate inclusion of medium and long range dispersion interactions. Practical computation of inter- and intra-macrobiomolecule interaction energies, in particular, requires a fairly accurate yet not overly expensive methodology. It is also desirable to compute intermolecular energies not only at their equilibrium (lowest energy) configurations but also over a range of biophysically relevant distances. We present a method to compute intermolecular interaction energies by including an empirical correction for dispersion which is valid over a range of intermolecular distances. This is achieved by optimizing parameters that moderate the empirical correction by explicit comparison of density functional (B3LYP) energies with distance-dependent (DD) reference values obtained at the CCSD(T)/CBS limit. The resulting method, hereafter referred to as B3LYP-DD, yields interaction energies with an accuracy generally better than 1 kcal mol(-1) for different types of noncovalent complexes, over a range of intermolecular distances and interaction strengths, relative to the expensive CCSD(T)/CBS standard. For a training set of dispersion interacting complexes, B3LYP-DD interaction energies in combination with diffuse functions display absolute errors equal to or smaller than 0.68 kcal mol(-1). The empirical correction does not significantly increase the computational cost as compared to standard density functional calculations. Applications relevant to biomolecular energy and structure, such as prediction of DNA base-pair interactions, are also presented.

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

4.6
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