error in bond dissociation energy of gas phase molecule
chen... at gmail.com
Thu Apr 7 12:21:34 UTC 2011
> In the inputs you gave you use TZV2P-GTH as basis set which is *not*
> 6-31g*, using a pseudopotential the wavefunction is different from the
> all electron wavefunction, so you cannot use the same basis for the
> core part.
> Aside from this 6-31g* can't even be properly represented with 280 Ry
> To compare you need to go to the basis set limit in *both* gaussian
> and cp2k (all electron calculation will probably have a larger BSSE),
> 6-31g* is not a particularly good basis set.
> You cannot use the same basis set in Gaussian and cp2k (unless you do
> all-electron GAPW).
> If really the basiset limit of GPW-GTH is much different from the one
> of gaussian, then yes probably it is an effect due to the
Sorry for the confusion. The inputs attached are doing usual GPW
calculations with pseudopotential and TZV2P basis sets. The GAPW
calculations I meant were indeed all electron calculations, for which
I haven't attached the inputs. I was certainly concerned about the
BSSE at the beginning. But our testing calculations in Gaussian showed
6-31g* gives converged results.
> Please note that gaussian used to call B3LYP a functional that does
> not correspond to the B3LYP functional published (they used a
> different VWN uniform density parameterization).
> I heard that the latest version might have fixed this, but I am not
> sure. (still I don't expect this difference to produce such large
> energy changes)
I agree this issue on B3LYP is secondary. I was also not entirely
certain how the boundary conditions affect HFX. My present focus is to
resolve the discrepancy on GGA functionals.
> using the GTH pseudo both GAP and GAPW should give the same results
> (allelectron is different).
> Please note that
> 1) sample (regtest) files are built to execute quickly, not to give
> accurate results
> 2) convergence wrt. cutoff is *not* variational
You are absolutely right on this. We just checked the results when
increasing the planewave cutoff. With a cutoff of 350, the all
electron calculations give H2O2 bond dissociation energy of 2.63 eV
(was 2.8 eV with smaller cutoff). This better value is almost the same
as the one from Gaussian.
More information about the CP2K-user