Performance of TD-DFT for Excited States of Open-Shell Transition Metal Compounds

Time-dependent density functional theory (TD-DFT) has been very successful in accessing low-lying excited states of closed-shell systems. However, it is much less so for excited states of open-shell systems: unrestricted Kohn–Sham based TD-DFT (U-TD-DFT) often produces physically meaningless excited...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe journal of physical chemistry. A, Molecules, spectroscopy, kinetics, environment, & general theory Vol. 121; no. 20; pp. 3929 - 3942
Main Authors Suo, Bingbing, Shen, Kaiyuan, Li, Zhendong, Liu, Wenjian
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States American Chemical Society 25.05.2017
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Time-dependent density functional theory (TD-DFT) has been very successful in accessing low-lying excited states of closed-shell systems. However, it is much less so for excited states of open-shell systems: unrestricted Kohn–Sham based TD-DFT (U-TD-DFT) often produces physically meaningless excited states due to heavy spin contaminations, whereas restricted Kohn–Sham based TD-DFT often misses those states of lower energies. A much better variant is the explicitly spin-adapted TD-DFT (X-TD-DFT) [J. Chem. Phys. 2011, 135, 194106] that can capture all the spin-adapted singly excited states yet without computational overhead over U-TD-DFT. While the superiority of X-TD-DFT over U-TD-DFT has been demonstrated for open-shell systems of main group elements, it remains to be seen if this is also the case for open-shell transition metal compounds. Taking as benchmark the results by MS-CASPT2 (multistate complete active space second-order perturbation theory) and ic-MRCISD (internally contracted multireference configuration interaction with singles and doubles), it is shown that X-TD-DFT is indeed superior to U-TD-DFT for the vertical excitation energies of ZnH, CdH, ScH2, YH2, YO, and NbO2. Admittedly, there exist a few cases where U-TD-DFT appears to be better than X-TD-DFT. However, this is due to a wrong reason: the underestimation (due to spin contamination) and the overestimation (due to either the exchange-correlation functional itself or the adiabatic approximation to the exchange-correlation kernel) happen to be compensated in the case of U-TD-DFT. As for [Cu­(C6H6)2]2+, which goes beyond the capability of both MS-CASPT2 and ic-MRCISD, X-TD-DFT revises the U-TD-DFT assignment of the experimental spectrum.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1089-5639
1520-5215
DOI:10.1021/acs.jpca.7b00752