REVIEW 1 cited by
Is valence CCSD(T) enough for the binding of water clusters? The isomers of (H$_2$O)$_6$ and (H$_2$O)$_{20}$ as a case study
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
Benchmark calculations on noncovalent interactions typically exclude correlation effects beyond valence CCSD(T) owing to their steep computational cost scaling. In this work, we consider their importance for water clusters, specifically, eight isomers of (H$_2$O)$_6$ and four Wales-Hodges isomers of (H$_2$O)$_{20}$. Higher order connected triples, $T_3$--(T), reduce dissociation energies of the latter by about 0.4 kcal/mol, but this is more than compensated by an increase of up to 0.85 kcal/mol due to connected quadruple excitations. In general, higher-order correlation effects favor more compact isomers over more `spread-out' ones. We also consider additional small effects for balance: scalar relativistics reduce binding in (H$_2$O)$_{20}$ by ca. --0.4 kcal/mol, which fortuitously is compensated by the ca. 0.55 kcal/mol diagonal Born-Oppenheimer correction. Core-valence correlation has the greatest impact, at ca. 1.3 kcal/mol for the icosamer.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Post-CCSD(T) corrections in the S66 noncovalent interactions benchmark
High-level CCSDT and CCSDT(Q) calculations on the S66 benchmark show that the error cancellation in CCSD(T) breaks down for pi-stacking complexes, which are overbound, and simple fitted formulas estimate the correctio...
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.