4.7 Article

Franck-Condon factors based on anharmonic vibrational wave functions of polyatomic molecules

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS
卷 125, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1063/1.2209676

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Franck-Condon (FC) integrals of polyatomic molecules are computed on the basis of vibrational self-consistent-field (VSCF) or configuration-interaction (VCI) calculations capable of including vibrational anharmonicity to any desired extent (within certain molecular size limits). The anharmonic vibrational wave functions of the initial and final states are expanded unambiguously by harmonic oscillator basis functions of normal coordinates of the respective electronic states. The anharmonic FC integrals are then obtained as linear combinations of harmonic counterparts, which can, in turn, be evaluated by established techniques taking account of the Duschinsky rotations, geometry displacements, and frequency changes. Alternatively, anharmonic wave functions of both states are expanded by basis functions of just one electronic state, permitting the FC integral to be evaluated directly by the Gauss-Hermite quadrature used in the VSCF and VCI steps [Bowman , Mol. Phys. 104, 33 (2006)]. These methods in conjunction with the VCI and coupled-cluster with singles, doubles, and perturbative triples [CCSD(T)] method have predicted the peak positions and intensities of the vibrational manifold in the X B-2(1) photoelectron band of H2O with quantitative accuracy. It has revealed that two weakly visible peaks are the result of intensity borrowing from nearby states through anharmonic couplings, an effect explained qualitatively by VSCF and quantitatively by VCI, but not by the harmonic approximation. The X B-2(2) photoelectron band of H2CO is less accurately reproduced by this method, likely because of the inability of CCSD(T)/cc-pVTZ to describe the potential energy surface of open-shell H2CO+ with the same high accuracy as in H2O+. (c) 2006 American Institute of Physics.

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