Calculation of origin-independent optical rotation tensor components in approximate time-dependent density functional theory

2006 ◽  
Vol 125 (3) ◽  
pp. 034102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mykhaylo Krykunov ◽  
Jochen Autschbach
Keyword(s):  
Density Functional Theory ◽  
Density Functional ◽  
Optical Rotation ◽  
Time Dependent ◽  
Rotation Tensor ◽  
Functional Theory ◽  
Dependent Density

Optical Rotation Calculated with Time-Dependent Density Functional Theory: The OR45 Benchmark

2011 ◽  
Vol 115 (40) ◽  
pp. 10930-10949 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monika Srebro ◽  
Niranjan Govind ◽  
Wibe A. de Jong ◽  
Jochen Autschbach
Keyword(s):  
Density Functional Theory ◽  
Density Functional ◽  
Optical Rotation ◽  
Time Dependent ◽  
Functional Theory ◽  
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