[CP2K:8650] Re: questions about TDDFPT2
Hanning Chen
chenh... at gmail.com
Tue Feb 7 22:27:10 UTC 2017
Matt,
Thanks for your clarification. I agree with you that the coupling term
between occupied-virtual orbital pairs may deviate the excitation energy
from HOMO-LUMO gap. I was just surprised by the rather large deviation on
an isolated molecule which may stem from its small basis set as well as its
small box size, as your suggested. I will make the system bigger with a
larger basis set.
Best,
Hanning
On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Matt W <MattWa... at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Hanning,
>
> I've not had a chance to look at your particular calculation. Such a small
> basis set, and small box could lead to strange results in any case. More
> generally, there is no reason, even if the transition is a pure single
> determinant HOMO to LUMO, for the energy to be that of the HOMO_LUMO gap.
> There are still additional terms in the TDDFT kernel that will shift the
> transition energy.
> For GGAs the shifts can be in either direction, there is no general rule.
> We have checked small molecule transition energies vs gamess-us and were
> pretty happy with the comparison.
>
> HTH,
>
> Matt
>
>
> On Sunday, February 5, 2017 at 8:50:49 PM UTC, NUCP2K wrote:
>>
>> Dear CP2K Developers and Users,
>>
>> I just tried out the latest implementation of time-dependent density
>> functional perturbation theory (TDDFPT) in CP2K, and found some serious
>> inconsistencies on the calculated excitation energy.
>>
>> I tested the TDDFPT2 on an isolated water (H2O) molecule using the
>> attached input file. Interestingly, the calculated excitation energy of
>> 10.075 eV is much much greater than the HOMO-LUMO gap of 9.137 eV, even
>> though the transition is dominated (>99.9%) by the electron transfer from
>> HOMO to LUMO.
>>
>> It seems to me that the diagonal terms of the TDDFPT response matrix
>> are not appropriately assigned, leading to the apparent inconsistency.
>> Perhaps, the subroutine "tddfpt_init_by_energy_diff" in
>> qs_tddfpt2_methods.F should be fixed to yield correct orbital energy gap.
>>
>> Please correct me if my understanding is wrong.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Hanning
>>
>>
>> &FORCE_EVAL
>> METHOD QS
>> &PROPERTIES
>> &TDDFPT
>> NSTATES 1
>> MAX_ITER 100
>> MAX_KV 10
>> CONVERGENCE [eV] 1.0E-3
>> &DIPOLE_MOMENTS
>> DIPOLE_FORM LENGTH
>> &END DIPOLE_MOMENTS
>> &MGRID
>> COMMENSURATE
>> CUTOFF 50
>> &END MGRID
>> &END TDDFPT
>> &END PROPERTIES
>> &DFT
>> BASIS_SET_FILE_NAME BASIS_SET
>> POTENTIAL_FILE_NAME POTENTIAL
>> &MGRID
>> COMMENSURATE
>> CUTOFF 50
>> &END MGRID
>> &POISSON
>> PERIODIC NONE
>> POISSON WAVELET
>> &END POISSON
>> &SCF
>> SCF_GUESS ATOMIC
>> &END SCF
>> &XC
>> &XC_FUNCTIONAL PBE
>> &END XC_FUNCTIONAL
>> &XC_GRID
>> XC_DERIV SPLINE2_SMOOTH
>> &END XC_GRID
>> &END XC
>> &END DFT
>> &SUBSYS
>> &CELL
>> ABC 6.0 6.0 6.0
>> PERIODIC NONE
>> &END CELL
>> &COORD
>> O 3.000000 3.000000 3.000000 H2O1
>> H 3.000000 3.000000 4.000000 H2O1
>> H 3.942809 3.000000 2.666667 H2O1
>> &END COORD
>> &KIND H
>> BASIS_SET SZV-GTH
>> POTENTIAL GTH-PADE-q1
>> &END KIND
>> &KIND O
>> BASIS_SET SZV-GTH
>> POTENTIAL GTH-PADE-q6
>> &END KIND
>> &TOPOLOGY
>> &END TOPOLOGY
>> &END SUBSYS
>> &END FORCE_EVAL
>> &GLOBAL
>> PROJECT WATER
>> PRINT_LEVEL MEDIUM
>> RUN_TYPE ENERGY
>> &END GLOBAL
>>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "cp2k" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to cp2k+uns... at googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to cp... at googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/cp2k.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.cp2k.org/archives/cp2k-user/attachments/20170207/3e150d1c/attachment.htm>
More information about the CP2K-user
mailing list