Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

On the applicability of CCSD(T) for dispersion interactions in large conjugated systems

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that CCSD(T) remains accurate for dispersion interactions in large conjugated systems up to at least circumcoronene, and that the perturbative triples treatment will not diverge in that size range.

desk verdict A careful PPP-model benchmark that makes a plausible case that CCSD(T) is not the source of the DMC discrepancy, but the 2D extrapolation rests on an unanchored CCSDT(Q) reference. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.13986 v1 pith:XI22G5RQ submitted 2024-11-21 physics.chem-ph

S. Lambie , D. Kats , D. Usyvat , A. Alavi This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.chem-ph
keywords CCSD(T)coupledclusterdispersioninteractionsPariser-Parr-Poplemodelnon-covalentHOMO-LUMOgappolyaromatichydrocarbonsdiffusionMonteCarlo
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper tackles a practical question raised by recent conflicts between two leading quantum chemistry methods: when two large conjugated molecules stick together by dispersion forces, do the discrepancies reported between CCSD(T) and fixed-node diffusion Monte Carlo mean the 'gold standard' CCSD(T) has broken down? To study sizes far beyond what full CCSD(T) benchmarks can reach, the authors switch to the minimal Pariser-Parr-Pople (PPP) model, which keeps one electron per carbon site and a long-range Coulomb term, and which they show reproduces both bandgap closure and the r$^{-6}$ law for dispersion at long range. Within this model they run very high-order coupled cluster calculations (CCSDTQ and CCSDT(Q)) on dimers of linear acenes and two-dimensional polyaromatic hydrocarbons up to the dibenzocoronene dimer. The result is that CCSD(T) tracks the higher-order references closely, with error actually decreasing to about one percent for the largest systems, while full CCSDT is the one that deviates. The authors conclude that the perturbative treatment of triples in CCSD(T) will not cause divergence for molecular sizes up to at least circumcoronene, shifting suspicion to local approximations, basis-set superposition error, fixed-node error, and other practical sources of discrepancy.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing device is the Pariser-Parr-Pople (PPP) model Hamiltonian with Ohno's long-range Coulomb parameterization, using the 'standard' parameters $U = 11.13$ eV, $t = 2.40$ eV, and $\alpha = 0.612$ $\mathrm{\AA}^{-2}$. The model keeps only one electron per carbon site, which makes it possible to run full CCSDTQ on dimers up to tetracene and CCSDT(Q) up to pentacene—sizes unreachable with realistic basis sets. The argument runs through the HOMO-LUMO gap: in Møller-Plesset based perturbative triples the energy denominators shrink as the gap closes, so the gap serves as a proxy for the risk of divergence. The paper validates the PPP model by showing it reproduces the known bandgap closure of acenes and the $r^{-6}$ long-range dispersion law, then uses the hierarchy CCSD, CCSD(T), CCSDT, CCSDT(Q), CCSDTQ to show that the perturbative treatment of triples stays accurate while full CCSDT does not.

What would settle it

Perform CCSDT(Q) benchmark calculations for the real coronene and circumcoronene dimers in a complete-basis-set-extrapolated, counterpoise-corrected basis and compare with CCSD(T) at the same geometry; if CCSD(T) overestimates the interaction relative to the higher-order reference by more than a few percent, or if the CCSD(T) error grows monotonically with system size when moving from naphthalene to pentacene in a full-electron calculation, the paper's central conclusion would be falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim of the paper is that CCSD(T) remains a reliable method for non-covalent interactions in large conjugated molecules up to at least the size of circumcoronene, and that the recently reported discrepancies between fixed-node diffusion Monte Carlo and local CCSD(T) results do not originate from a breakdown of the leading CCSD(T) terms. In the PPP model, benchmarked against CCSDTQ and CCSDT(Q), CCSD(T) shows no sign of overestimating the dispersion energy; for the largest systems it errs by about one percent relative to CCSDT(Q), and it outperforms full CCSDT, which underestimates the dispersion by up to fourteen percent for the 2D systems. Because the HF HOMO-LUMO gaps of coronene (7.63 eV) and circumcoronene (5.80 eV) sit well above the range where perturbative triples could become problematic, the authors conclude that the divergence must be sought in the approximations used to make the calculations tractable—local correlation fitting, basis-set superposition error, and the fixed-node approximation—rather than in the CCSD(T) method itself.

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that the PPP model, which strips each carbon to a single electron and omits sigma electrons, exchange repulsion, and explicit hydrogen atoms, reproduces the trends—though not the magnitudes—of dispersion and gap closure in real pi-conjugated systems; if those trends are not transferable, the conclusion about real coronene and circumcoronene does not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the paper is right, the reported DMC-versus-CCSD(T) discrepancies for large conjugated complexes should be attributed to the practical approximations—local natural orbital fitting, basis-set superposition error, counterpoise corrections, or the fixed-node approximation—rather than to a failure of CCSD(T)'s perturbative triples.
  • CCSDT should not be used as a higher-order reference for non-covalent interactions in large systems; its errors grow with system size, and benchmarks should use CCSDT(Q) or better.
  • CCSD(T) can be applied to dispersion-dominated complexes up to roughly circumcoronene size with confidence, provided the HF HOMO-LUMO gap stays above the neighborhood of 4.65 eV observed in this study.
  • DCSD, at a cost closer to CCSD than CCSD(T), reproduces the CCSD(T) dispersion energies to within a few percent and could serve as a practical alternative for large systems.
  • The PPP model, despite its minimalism, is a viable testbed for benchmarking high-order coupled cluster methods on large pi-systems, so future methodological comparisons can use it to reach sizes inaccessible to full-electron calculations.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • By extrapolation, the paper's gap-based criterion implies that CCSD(T) will eventually diverge for systems that approach the metallic limit, but only at sizes far beyond circumcoronene; the exact crossover size could be probed by running the same PPP benchmarks on longer acenes or larger 2D PAHs where the HF gap falls below roughly 4.5 eV.
  • If the discrepancy instead comes from fixed-node DMC or from local approximations, then improving the DMC trial wavefunctions or the local CCSD(T) fitting could bring the methods into agreement at the sizes currently disputed; that is a testable consequence for future DMC studies.
  • The paper's observation that CCSD(T) underestimates relative to CCSDTQ suggests that a fully converged higher-order CC answer might be more negative than the current local CCSD(T) results, potentially widening rather than closing the gap between CC and DMC.
  • Because the PPP model omits exchange repulsion and sigma electrons, the magnitude of the dispersion energy is an artifact; a natural next step is to test whether the same method ordering and gap-dependence hold in a model that includes sigma electrons or a minimal basis real-system calculation.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper addresses the recently reported discrepancies between fixed-node DMC and local-orbital CCSD(T) for non-covalent interactions in large conjugated systems. Using the Pariser-Parr-Pople (PPP) model, the authors benchmark CCSD, CCSD(T), CCSDT, CCSDT(Q), CCSDTQ, DCSD, and MP2 for dispersion interactions in one-dimensional acene dimers (up to tetracene for CCSDTQ, pentacene for CCSDT(Q)) and two-dimensional polyaromatic hydrocarbon dimers (up to dibenzocoronene, with CCSDT(Q) as the reference). They find that CCSD(T) performs excellently relative to the higher-order CC references, that CCSDT is an unreliable benchmark, and that DCSD performs comparably to CCSD(T). Based on the HOMO-LUMO gaps of the studied systems, they conclude that the perturbative triples treatment in CCSD(T) will not cause divergence for molecular sizes up to circumcoronene.

Significance. If the conclusions hold, the paper makes an important contribution to the ongoing debate about the origin of DMC/CCSD(T) discrepancies for large non-covalent complexes: it suggests that the leading CCSD(T) terms are not at fault at the sizes of coronene and circumcoronene, and it identifies CCSDT as an inappropriate benchmark. The study is carefully executed within the model: CCSDTQ is used as an internal ground truth for 1D acenes up to tetracene, CCSDT(Q) is validated against CCSDTQ, and the same trends are reproduced at a second intermonomer separation (4.5 Å). The paper also makes a falsifiable prediction about DCSD as a cost-effective accurate alternative. The main limitation is that the evidence is entirely from the PPP model, which omits exchange repulsion, sigma electrons, and hydrogen atoms; the transferability of the trends to real systems is asserted rather than demonstrated, and the 2D benchmark lacks a CCSDTQ anchor.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5.2.2, Figure 7] The 2D benchmark uses CCSDT(Q) as the sole reference, without any CCSDTQ anchor for a 2D PAH. The validation of CCSDT(Q) against CCSDTQ is performed only for 1D acenes (Figure 5) over a HOMO-LUMO gap range of 11.34–6.34 eV, whereas the 2D systems include dibenzocoronene with a PPP gap of 4.65 eV (Figure 3), which lies outside the validated range. Since the central claim that CCSD(T) does not overestimate dispersion for 2D PAHs (and therefore for coronene and circumcoronene) depends on the accuracy of the CCSDT(Q) reference, the statement that "given the excellent performance of CCSDT(Q) relative to CCSDTQ for the linear acenes... CCSDT(Q) is an appropriate reference methodology for these systems" is an assertion of transferability rather than a test. I recommend adding at least one CCSDTQ calculation for a modest 2D dimer (e.g., pyrene or coronene) to anchor the 2D benchmark.
  2. [§4.2, §6] The paper's concluding claim that "the perturbative treatment of the triple excitations will not cause divergence for molecular sizes up to circumcoronene" is framed as a statement about real molecular systems, but the evidence is entirely from the PPP model, which omits exchange repulsion, sigma electrons, and hydrogen atoms. The transferability of trends is asserted in §4.2 ("the trends are transferable"), yet the only real-system comparison in §5.1.1 is for HOMO-LUMO gaps, not for interaction energies or CC method differences. If the size-dependent behavior of the perturbative triples correction is sensitive to the omitted physics, the conclusion about real systems does not follow. A concrete test would be to benchmark a smaller real PAH dimer (e.g., pyrene or coronene) at CCSDT(Q) or CCSDTQ with a modest basis set to see whether the CCSD(T) error trends mirror the PPP model.
  3. [§5.2.3] The conclusion about circumcoronene is an extrapolation beyond the largest computed system, dibenzocoronene. The HOMO-LUMO gap argument is used to bridge this gap, but the paper does not establish that the HOMO-LUMO gap is a sufficient control parameter for the accuracy of the perturbative triples treatment. The slow decay of the gap with size (Figure 3) is suggestive but not proof that CCSD(T) remains accurate. I would like to see either a direct CCSD(T) vs CCSDT(Q) calculation for the circumcoronene dimer in the PPP model (if tractable) or an explicit analysis of how the CCSD(T) error correlates with the HOMO-LUMO gap across both the 1D and 2D datasets.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract, Ref. [24]] The abstract cites "Nat. Comm., 2021, 12, 3927" for Al-Hamdani et al., but reference [24] lists the article number as 3297. The correct article number is 3927 (Nature Communications 12, 3927 (2021)); please verify and correct.
  2. [Figure 7 caption] The caption says "up to the coronene dimer," but the x-axis includes dibenzocoronene and the text in §5.2.2 and the abstract specify dibenzocoronene. The caption should be corrected to "up to the dibenzocoronene dimer."
  3. [§5.2.1, §5.2.2] The 1D results show a monotonic decrease in the CCSD(T) error to about 1% (Figure 6), whereas the 2D results show errors in the range 1.4–2.9% without a clear monotonic trend (Figure 7). This difference in behavior between 1D and 2D is not discussed; a comment would help the reader understand whether the 2D deviations are significant.
  4. [ESI Note 1, §5.1.1] The exponential extrapolation of the real acene HOMO-LUMO gaps gives a limit of 1.91 eV, while the periodic HF calculation gives 2.56 eV. The paper states that the true gap likely sits in the 2–3 eV range, but does not comment on why the extrapolation and periodic result differ. A brief explanation would improve confidence in the extrapolation procedure.
  5. [Eq. (1), §3] The Hamiltonian in Eq. (1) includes a shift added to the diagonal of the one-body operator and a core energy to account for electron-nuclear interactions, but these terms are not written out explicitly. Providing the explicit diagonal term would make the model completely reproducible.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the benchmark energies are computed in-paper and the gap-based extrapolation is not a fitted input to the CCSD(T) comparison.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained with respect to its central benchmark claim. CCSDTQ and CCSDT(Q) reference energies are computed in this paper from the same PPP Hamiltonian, rather than imported from fitted or author-specific data. The central comparison is a direct calculation: Edisp = Edimer - 2 Emonomer, with all coupled-cluster methods run on identical model geometries and integrals. The HOMO-LUMO gap is used as an extrapolation criterion to argue that coronene and circumcoronene lie in a tested gap regime, but the interaction energies of CCSD(T) are not fitted to those gaps; they are separately computed and compared with higher-order CC results. No equation defining CCSD(T) performance is shown to reduce to the gap values or to a prior self-citation. The only author-related citations (DumpHam, Molpro, DCSD) are tool and method references and are not load-bearing for the conclusion. The use of CCSDT(Q) as the sole reference for 2D PAHs, without a CCSDTQ anchor in 2D, is an extrapolation and benchmark-accuracy concern, not a circularity: CCSDT(Q)'s error is not defined in terms of the CCSD(T) results it is used to judge. Therefore no circular step can be exhibited, and the score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim about real systems rests on a semiempirical model with three externally calibrated parameters, one approximate benchmark in 2D, and a gap-based extrapolation. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • U, onsite Coulomb repulsion in PPP model = 11.13 eV
    Standard PPP parameter taken from Sony et al.; not fitted in this paper, but the central method comparisons depend on it.
  • t, hopping integral in PPP model = 2.40 eV
    Standard PPP parameter taken from Sony et al.; controls band structure and dispersion behavior.
  • alpha, range parameter in Ohno Coulomb interaction = 0.612 Angstrom^-2
    Standard PPP parameter taken from Sony et al.; controls long-range behavior of the interaction.
  • Exponential extrapolation parameters for acene HOMO-LUMO gap = limits: 3.20 eV (PPP), 1.91 eV (real)
    Used in ESI Note 1 to estimate the infinite acene gap; fitted to HF data for rings 6 to 20, supporting the finite gap argument.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption PPP model captures the essential physics of pi-conjugated systems relevant to bandgap closure and dispersion.
    Section 2 and Section 5.1 argue that the model reproduces bandgap closure and r^-6 behavior, making it a proxy for real systems.
  • domain assumption Trends from the PPP model transfer to real molecular systems even though magnitudes do not.
    Section 4.2 states explicitly that the magnitude of dispersion energies is not representative but trends are transferable.
  • domain assumption The Hartree-Fock HOMO-LUMO gap is a sufficient indicator for when perturbative triples in CCSD(T) become unreliable.
    Section 5.2.3 uses gap values to extend conclusions to circumcoronene without computing CCSD(T) for that system.
  • domain assumption CCSDT(Q) is a reliable reference for the 2D PAH dimers, where CCSDTQ is not affordable.
    Section 5.2.2 relies on the 1D CCSDTQ validation and on Rezac et al., rather than on direct CCSDTQ benchmarks in 2D.
  • domain assumption CCSDTQ is effectively exact for the small model dimers tested.
    The paper uses CCSDTQ as the anchor benchmark for acenes up to tetracene; this assumes the remaining higher excitations are negligible.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On the applicability of CCSD(T) for dispersion interactions in large conjugated systems." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XI22G5RQ

@misc{pith2026241113986,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On the applicability of CCSD(T) for dispersion interactions in large conjugated systems},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XI22G5RQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.13986}
}
read the original abstract

In light of the recent discrepancies reported between fixed node diffusion Monte Carlo and local natural orbital coupled cluster with single, double and perturbative triples (CCSD(T)) methodologies for non-covalent interactions in large molecular systems [Al-Hamdani et al., Nat. Comm., 2021, 12, 3927], the applicability of CCSD(T) is assessed using a model framework. The use of the Pariser-Parr-Pople (PPP) model for studying large molecules is critically examined and is shown to recover both bandgap closure as system size increases and long range dispersive behavior of r^-6 with increasing separation between monomers, in corollary with real systems. Using the PPP model, coupled cluster methodologies, CCSDTQ and CCSDT(Q), are then used to benchmark CCSDT and CCSD(T) methodologies for non-covalent interactions in large one- and two-dimensional molecular systems up to the dibenzocoronene dimer. We show that CCSD(T) demonstrates no signs of overestimating the interaction energy for these systems. Furthermore, by examining the Hartree-Fock HOMO-LUMO gap of these large molecules, the perturbative treatment of the triples contribution in CCSD(T) is not expected to cause problems for accurately capturing the interaction energy for system sizes up to at least circumcoronene.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.13986 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. An example of the tetracene dimer in the sandwich geometry. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Molecular systems considered in this study, categorized as 1D linear acenes and 2D [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The HF HOMO-LUMO gap of the (a) 1D acenes and (b) 2D PAHs. Real systems [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) Interaction curve for the PPP model and (b) the corresponding ln-ln plot. Fits [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a) Total dispersion interaction between acene systems and (b) the performance of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (a) Total dispersion interaction between acene systems and (b) the performance of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: (a) Total dispersion interaction between 2D PAH systems and (b) the performance of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png]
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Exponential extrapolation of the HOMO-LUMO gap for the real molecular systems [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_1.png]
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Bandstructure of graphene as calculated using periodic Hartree Fock. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_2.png]
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (a) Interaction curve for the PPP model compared to the separation between [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_3.png]
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Total interaction energy from different quantum chemical methods as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a) The performance of quantum chemical methods with reference to the CCSDT(Q) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Systematic discrepancies between reference methods for non-covalent interactions within the S66 dataset

    physics.chem-ph 2024-12 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Diffusion Monte Carlo interaction energies for the full S66 dataset reveal systematic deviations from CCSD(T) that correlate with the ratio of electrostatic to dispersion contributions.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 69 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    London , Zur Theorie und Systematik der Molekularkr\"afte

    F. London , Zur Theorie und Systematik der Molekularkr\"afte . Z. Phys. 1930 , 63 , 245--279

    work page 1930

  2. [2]

    Hermann, R

    J. Hermann, R. A. DiStasio, A. Tkatchenko , First-principles models for van der Waals interactions in molecules and materials: Concepts, theory, and applications . Chem. Rev. 2017 , 117 , 4714--4758

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    Grimme , Accurate description of van der Waals complexes by density functional theory including empirical corrections

    S. Grimme , Accurate description of van der Waals complexes by density functional theory including empirical corrections . J. Comput. Chem. 2004 , 25 , 1463--1473

    work page 2004

  4. [4]

    Grimme , Semiempirical GGA-type density functional constructed with a long-range dispersion correction

    S. Grimme , Semiempirical GGA-type density functional constructed with a long-range dispersion correction . J. Comp. Chem. 2006 , 27 , 1787--1799

    work page 2006

  5. [5]

    Grimme, S

    S. Grimme, S. Ehrlich, L. Goergik , Effect of the damping function in dispersion corrected density functional theory . J. Comput. Chem. 2010 , 32 , 1456--1465

    work page 2010

  6. [6]

    Grimme , Density functional theory with London dispersion corrections

    S. Grimme , Density functional theory with London dispersion corrections . WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci. 2011 , 1 , 211--228

    work page 2011

  7. [7]

    Grimme, S

    S. Grimme, S. Ehrlich, L. Goerigk , Effect of the damping function in dispersion corrected density functional theory . J. Comp. Chem. 2011 , 32 , 1456--1465

    work page 2011

  8. [8]

    Grimme , Supramolecular binding thermodynamics by dispersion-corrected density functional theory

    S. Grimme , Supramolecular binding thermodynamics by dispersion-corrected density functional theory . Chem. Eur. J 2012 , 18 , 9955--9964

    work page 2012

Show all 69 references
  1. [9]

    Tkatchenko, M

    A. Tkatchenko, M. Scheffler , Accurate molecular van der Waals interactions from ground-state electron density and free atom reference data . Phys. Rev. Lett. 2009 , 102 , 073005

    2009

  2. [10]

    Barratt, R

    E. Barratt, R. J. Bingham, D. J. Warner, C. A. Laughton, S. E. V. Phillips , van der Waals interactions dominate ligand-protein association in a protein binding site occluded from solvent water . J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005 , 127 , 11827--11834

    2005

  3. [11]

    P. E. M. Siegbahn, M. R. A. Blomberg, S.-L. Chen , Significant van der Waals effects in transition metal complexes . J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2010 , 6 , 2040--2044

    2010

  4. [12]

    B. R. Goldsmith, J. Florian, J.-X. Liu, P. Gruene, J. T. Lyon, D. M. Rayner, A. Fielicke, M. Scheffler, L. M. Ghiringhello , Two-to-three dimensional transition in neutral gold clusters: The crucial role of van der Waals interactions and temperature . Phys. Rev. Mater. 2019 , ...

    2019

  5. [13]

    J. C. F. Rodriguez-Reyes, C. G. F. Siler, W. Liu, A. Tkatchenko, C. M. Friend, R. J. Madix , van der Waals interactions determine selectivity in catalysis by metallic gold . J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2014 , 136 , 13333--13340

    2014

  6. [14]

    W. Gao, A. Tkatchenko , Sliding mechanisms in multilayered hexagonal boron nitride and graphene: The effects of directionality, thickness and sliding constraints . Phys. Rev. Lett. 2015 , 114 , 096101

    2015

  7. [15]

    Shtogun, L

    Y. Shtogun, L. M. Woods , Many-body van der Waals interactions between graphitic nanostructures . J. Chem. Phys. Lett. 2010 , 1 , 1356--1362

    2010

  8. [16]

    Autumn, M

    K. Autumn, M. Sitti, Y. A. Liang, A. M. Peattie, W. R. Hansen, S. Sponberg, T. W. Kenny, R. Fearing, J. N. Israelachvili, R. J. Full , Evidence for van der Waals adhesion in gecko setae . Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2002 , 99 , 12252--12256

    2002

  9. [17]

    Autumn, N

    K. Autumn, N. Gravish , Gecko adhesion: evolutionary nanotechnology . Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 2008 , 366 , 1575--1590

    2008

  10. [18]

    R. J. Bartlett, M. Musia , Coupled-cluster theory in quantum chemistry . Rev. Mod. Phys. 2007 , 79 , 291--352

    2007

  11. [19]

    Helgaker, T

    T. Helgaker, T. A. Ruden, P. J rgensen, J. Olsen, W. Klopper , A priori calculation of molecular properties to chemical accuracy . J. Phys. Org. Chem. 2004 , 17 , 913--933

    2004

  12. [20]

    W. M. C. Foulkes, L. Mitas, R. J. Needs, G. Rajagopal , Quantum Monte Carlo simulations of solids . Rev. Mod. Phys. 2001 , 73 , 33--83

    2001

  13. [21]

    Dubeck\'y, R

    M. Dubeck\'y, R. Derian, P. Jure c ka, L. Mitas, P. Hobza, M. Otyepka , Quantum Monte Carlo for noncovalent interactions: an efficient protocol attaining benchmark accuracy . Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2014 , 16 , 20915--20923

    2014

  14. [22]

    Dubeck\'y, P

    M. Dubeck\'y, P. Jure c ka, R. Derian, P. Hobza, M. Otyepka, L. Mitas , Quantum Monte Carlo describe noncovalent interactions with subchemical accuracy . J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2013 , 9 , 4287--4292

    2013

  15. [23]

    Azadi, R

    S. Azadi, R. E. Cohen , Chemical accuracy from quantum Monte Carlo for the benzene dimer . J. Chem. Phys. 2015 , 143 , 104301

    2015

  16. [24]

    Y. S. Al-Hamdani, P. R. Nagy, A. Zen, D. Barton, M. K\' a lly, J. G. Brandenburg, A. Tkatchenko , Interactions between large molecules pose a puzzle for reference quantum mechanical methods . Nat. Comm. 2021 , 12 , 3297

    2021

  17. [25]

    Villot, F

    C. Villot, F. Ballesteros, D. Wang, K. U. Lao , Coupled cluster benchmarking of large noncovalent complexes in L7 and S12L as well as the C 60 dimer, DNA-ellipticine and HIV-indinavir . J. Phys. Chem. A 2022 , 126 , 4326--4341

    2022

  18. [26]

    Ballesteros, S

    F. Ballesteros, S. Dunivan, K. U. Lao , Coupled cluster benchmarks of large noncovalent complexes: The L7 dataset as well as DNA-ellipticine and buckycatcher-fullerene . J. Chem. Phys. 2021 , 154 , 15404

    2021

  19. [27]

    Ma, H.-J

    Q. Ma, H.-J. Werner , Scalable electron correlation methods. 5. Parallel perturbative triples correction for explicitly correlated local coupled cluster with pair natural orbitals . J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2018 , 14 , 198--215

    2018

  20. [28]

    Neese, A

    F. Neese, A. Hansen, D. G. Liakos , Efficient and accurate approximations to the local coupled cluster singles doubles method using a truncated pair natural orbital basis . J. Chem. Phys. 2009 , 131 , 064103

    2009

  21. [29]

    P. R. Nagy, G. Samu, M. K\' a llay , Optimization of the linear-scaling local natural orbital CCSD(T) method: Improved algorithm and benchmark applications . J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2018 , 14 , 4193--4215

    2018

  22. [30]

    P. J. Reynolds, D. M. Ceperley, B. J. Alder, W. A. Lester Jr. , Fixed-node quantum Monte Carlo for molecules . J. Chem. Phys. 1982 , 77 , 5593--5603

    1982

  23. [31]

    Troyer, U.-J

    M. Troyer, U.-J. Wiese , Computational complexity and fundamental limitations to fermionic quantum Monte Carlo simulations . Phys. Rev. Lett. 2005 , 94 , 170201

    2005

  24. [32]

    M. O. Sinnokrot, C. D. Sherrill , Highly accurate coupled cluster potential energy curves for the benzene dimer: Sandwich, T-shaped, and parallel-displaced configurations . J. Phys. Chem. A 2004 , 108 , 10200--10207

    2004

  25. [33]

    M. O. Sinnokrot, C. D. Sherrill , High accuracy quantum mechanical studies of - interactions in benzene dimers . J. Phys. Chem. A 2006 , 110 , 10655--10920

    2006

  26. [34]

    Pito n \'ak, P

    M. Pito n \'ak, P. Neogr\'ady, J. R ez\'a c , P. Jure c ka, M. Urban, P. Hobza , Benzene dimer: High-level wave function and density functional theory calculations . J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2008 , 4 , 1829--1934

    2008

  27. [35]

    Tsuzuki, T

    S. Tsuzuki, T. Uchimari, K. Matsumura, M. Mikami, K. Tanabe , Effects of the higher electron correlation correction on the calculated intermolecular interaction energies of benzene and naphthalene dimers: Comparison between MP2 and CCSD(T) calculations . Chem. Phys. Lett. 2000...

    2000

  28. [36]

    Hobza, H

    P. Hobza, H. L. Selzle, E. W. Schlag , Potential energy surface for the benzene dimer. Results of ab initio CCSD(T) calculations show two nearly isoenergetic structures: T-shaped and parallel displaced . J. Phys. Chem. 1996 , 100 , 18790--18794

    1996

  29. [37]

    B. Shen, J. Tatchen, E. Sanchez-Garcia, H. F. Bettinger , Evolution of the optical gap in the acene series: Undecacene . Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2018 , 130 , 10537--10931

    2018

  30. [38]

    T\"onshoff, H

    C. T\"onshoff, H. F. Bettinger , Pushing the limits of acene chemistry: The recent surge of large acenes . Chem. Eur. J. 2020 , 27 , 3187--3569

    2020

  31. [39]

    K. S. Novoselov, A. K. Geim, S. V. Morozov, D. Jiang, Y.Zhang, S. V. Dubonos, I. V. Grigorieva, A. A. Firsov , Electronic field effect in atomically thin carbon films . Science 2004 , 306 , 666--669

    2004

  32. [40]

    Kivelson, O

    S. Kivelson, O. L. Chapman , Polyacene and a new class of quasi-one-dimensioal conductors . Phys. Rev. B 1983 , 28 , 7236--7234

    1983

  33. [41]

    Jure c ka, J

    P. Jure c ka, J. S poner, J. C ern\' y , P. Hobza , Benchmark database of accurate (MP2 and CCSD(T) complete basis set limit) interaction energies of small model complexes, DNA base pairs, and amino acid pairs . Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2006 , 8 , 1985--1993

    2006

  34. [42]

    S. M. Cybulkski, M. L. Lytle , The origin of deficiency of the supermolecular second-order M ller-Plesset approach for evaluating interaction energies . J. Chem. Phys. 2007 , 127 , 141102

    2007

  35. [43]

    J. J. Shepherd, A. Gr\"uneis , Many-body quantum chemistry for the electron gas: Convergent perturbative theories . Phys. Rev. Lett. 2013 , 110 , 226401

    2013

  36. [44]

    Pariser, R

    R. Pariser, R. G. Parr , A semi-empirical theory of the electronic spectra and electronic structure of complex unsaturated molecules. I. J. Chem. Phys. 1953 , 21 , 466--471

    1953

  37. [45]

    Pariser, R

    R. Pariser, R. G. Parr , A semi-empirical theory of the electronic spectra and electronic structure of complex unsaturated molecules. II. J. Chem. Phys. 1953 , 21 , 767--776

    1953

  38. [46]

    J. A. Pople , Electron interaction in unsaturated hydrocarbons . Trans. Faraday Soc. 1953 , 49 , 1375--1385

    1953

  39. [47]

    S. F. Boys, F. Bernardi , The calculation of small molecular interactions by the differences of separate total energies. Some procedures with reduced errors . Mol. Phys 1970 , 19 , 553--566

    1970

  40. [48]

    Gutowski, J

    M. Gutowski, J. H. Van Lenthe, J. Verbeek, F. B. Van Duijneveldt, G. Cha ansi\'nki , The basis set superposition error in correlated electronic structure calculations . Chem. Phys. Lett. 1986 , 124 , 370--375

    1986

  41. [49]

    Ohno , Some remarks on the Pariser-Parr-Pople method

    K. Ohno , Some remarks on the Pariser-Parr-Pople method . Theor. Chim. Acta 1964 , 2 , 219--227

    1964

  42. [50]

    P. Sony, A. Shukla , Large-scale correlated study of excited state absorptions in naphthalene and anthracene . J. Chem. Phys. 2009 , 131 , 014302

    2009

  43. [51]

    Kats , DumpHam: FCIDUMP manipulation program

    D. Kats , DumpHam: FCIDUMP manipulation program . 2024 ; https://github.com/fkfest/dumpham

    2024

  44. [52]

    Werner, P

    H.-J. Werner, P. J. Knowles, G. Knizia, F. R. Manby, M. Sch\"utz, M. , Molpro: a general-purpose quantum chemistry program package . WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci. 2012 , 2 , 242--253

    2012

  45. [53]

    Werner, P

    H.-J. Werner, P. J. Knowles, F. R. Manby, J. A. Black, K. Doll, A. Heßelmann, D. Kats, A. Köhn, T. Korona, D. A. Kreplin, Q. Ma, T. F. Miller, A. Mitrushchenkov, K. A. Peterson, I. Polyak, G. Rauhut, M. Sibaev , The Molpro quantum chemistry package . J. Chem. Phys. 2020, 152, 144107

    2020

  46. [54]

    D. Kats, F. R. Manby , The distinguishable cluster approximation . J. Chem. Phys. 2013 , 139 , 021102

    2013

  47. [55]

    M ller, M

    C. M ller, M. S. Plesset , Note on an approximation treatment for many-electron systems . Phys. Rev. 1934 , 46 , 618--622

    1934

  48. [56]

    J. P. Perdew , Density Functional Theory and the band gap problem . Int. J. Quantum Chem. 1985 , 28 , 497--523

    1985

  49. [57]

    H. Xiao, J. Tahir-Kheli, W. A. Goddard , Accurate band gaps for semiconductors from density functional theory . J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2011 , 2 , 212--217

    2011

  50. [58]

    R ez\'ac, L

    J. R ez\'ac, L. S imov\'a', P. Hobza , CCSD[T] describes noncovalent interactions better than the CCSD(T), CCSD(TQ) and CCSDT methods . J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2013 , 9 , 346--369

    2013

  51. [59]

    R ez\'ac, P

    J. R ez\'ac, P. Hobza , Describing noncovalent interactions beyond the common approximations: How accurate is the ``gold standard'' CCSD(T) at the complete basis set limit? J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2013 , 9 , 2151--2155

    2013

  52. [60]

    afer, A. Irmler, A. Gallo, A. Gr\

    T. Sch\"afer, A. Irmler, A. Gallo, A. Gr\"uneis , Understanding discrepancies of wavefunction theories for large molecules . ArXiv 2024 , ,

    2024

  53. [61]

    B. W. Hopkins, G. S. Tschumper , Ab initio studies of - interactions: The effects of quadruple excitations . J. Chem. Phys. A 2004 , 108 , 2941--2948

    2004

  54. [62]

    E. G. Hohenstein, C. D. Sherrill , Wavefunction methods for noncovalent interactions . WIREs Interdiscip. Rev. Comput. Mol. Sci. 2012 , 2 , 304--326

    2012

  55. [63]

    u r Chemie, Humboldt-Universit \

    T. Janowski, P. Pulay , A benchmark comparison of / and / dispersion: The dimers of naphthalene and decalin, and coronene and perhydrocoronene . J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2012 , 134 , 17250--17525 mcitethebibliography arxiv_submission_main.tex000066400000000000000000002034041471760044...

    2012

  56. [64]

    Dovesi, A

    R. Dovesi, A. Erba, R. Orlando, C. M. Zicovich-Wilson, B. Civalleri, L. Maschio, M. R\'erat, S. Casassa, J. Baima, S. Salustro, B. Kirtman , Quantum-mechanical condensed matter simulations with CRYSTAL . WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci. 2018 , 8 , e1360

    2018

  57. [65]

    M. F. Peintinger and D. V. Oliveira, T. Bredow , Consistent gaussian basis sets of triple-zeta valence with polarization quality for solid-state calculations . J. Comp. Chem. 2013 , 34 , 451

    2013

  58. [66]

    A. K. Geim, K. S. Novoselov , The rise of graphene . Nat. Mater. 2007 , 6 , 183

    2007

  59. [67]

    Pisani, R

    C. Pisani, R. Dovesi, C. Roetti , Hartree-Fock Ab Initio Treatment of Crystalline solids ; Lecture Notes in Chemistry Series ; Springer Verlag : Berlin , 1988 ; Vol. 48

    1988

  60. [68]

    Dovesi, V

    R. Dovesi, V. R. Saunders, R. Roetti, R. Orlando, C. M. Zicovich-Wilson, F. Pascale, B. Civalleri, K. Doll, N. M. Harrison, I. J. Bush, P. D\'Arco, M. Llunell, M. Causa, Y. No \"e l, L. Maschio, A. Erba, M. R\'erat, S. Casassa, B.G. Searle, J.K. Desmarais , CRYSTAL23 User's Ma...

    2023

  61. [69]

    u r Chemie, Humboldt-Universit \

    D. D. Johnson , Modified Broyden's method for accelerating convergence in self-consistent calculation solid-state calculations . Phys. Rev B 1988 , 38 , 12807 mcitethebibliography arxiv_submission_supporting.tex0000664000000000000000000003037014717600441016205 0ustar rootroot ...

    1988

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.