Hydrodynamic approach to time-dependent density functional theory; Response properties of metal clusters

2000 ◽  
Vol 113 (14) ◽  
pp. 5614-5623 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arup Banerjee ◽  
Manoj K. Harbola
Keyword(s):  
Density Functional Theory ◽  
Density Functional ◽  
Metal Clusters ◽  
Time Dependent ◽  
Functional Theory ◽  
Response Properties ◽  
Hydrodynamic Approach ◽  
Dependent Density

Response Properties of Furan Homologues by Time-Dependent Density Functional Theory

2002 ◽  
Vol 106 (43) ◽  
pp. 10380-10390 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Hieringer ◽  
Stan J. A. van Gisbergen ◽  
Evert Jan Baerends
Keyword(s):  
Density Functional Theory ◽  
Density Functional ◽  
Time Dependent ◽  
Functional Theory ◽  
Response Properties ◽  
Dependent Density

Benchmark of Simplified Time-Dependent Density Functional Theory for UV-Vis Spectral Properties of Porphyrinoids

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kamal Batra ◽  
Stefan Zahn ◽  
Thomas Heine
Keyword(s):  
Density Functional Theory ◽  
Density Functional ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Absolute Error ◽  
Time Dependent ◽  
Basis Set ◽  
Basis Sets ◽  
Functional Theory ◽  
Framework Materials ◽  
Dependent Density

<p>We thoroughly benchmark time-dependent density- functional theory for the predictive calculation of UV/Vis spectra of porphyrin derivatives. With the aim to provide an approach that is computationally feasible for large-scale applications such as biological systems or molecular framework materials, albeit performing with high accuracy for the Q-bands, we compare the results given by various computational protocols, including basis sets, density-functionals (including gradient corrected local functionals, hybrids, double hybrids and range-separated functionals), and various variants of time-dependent density-functional theory, including the simplified Tamm-Dancoff approximation. An excellent choice for these calculations is the range-separated functional CAM-B3LYP in combination with the simplified Tamm-Dancoff approximation and a basis set of double-ζ quality def2-SVP (mean absolute error [MAE] of ~0.05 eV). This is not surpassed by more expensive approaches, not even by double hybrid functionals, and solely systematic excitation energy scaling slightly improves the results (MAE ~0.04 eV). </p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document