<div><b>Dear developers:</b></div><div>good morning/evening.</div><div>Using pyrimidine, I try to understand how to compute 0'-0 fluorescence energy (wavelength).</div><div><br></div><div><b>In gaussian, this relatively</b> well-established series of three calculations:</div><div>1) B3LYP/6-31+G(d,p) Opt <br>2) B3LYP/6-31+G(d,p) TD=(nstates=xx) <br>3) B3LYP/6-31+G(d,p) Opt TD=(nstates=xx,root=state_of_interest) <br>Emission energy is the difference Eex - Eexgr, where<br>Eex is the energy of the excited state: print in the string "TD-KS".<br>Eexgr is the ground state energy of the excited state geometry: print for the string "HF=-". <br></div><div><br></div><div><b>Here, I attach current CP2K results for pyrimidine </b>structural optimization</div><div>in the first excited state, while accounting the excitation set to include three states.</div><div><br></div><div>Upon every optimization cycle, the output file reports four energies, for example:<br></div><div></div><div>1) Total energy:                                               -45.00011553431995</div><div></div><div></div><div> !--------------------------- Excited State Energy ----------------------------!<br>2) Excitation Energy [Hartree]                                     0.1408310694<br>3) Total Energy [Hartree]                                           -44.8592844650</div><div>4)  ENERGY| Total FORCE_EVAL ( QS ) energy [a.u.]:   -44.859271658539249</div><div><br></div><div><b>Would you comment what are these?</b><br></div><div>Why there are three TOTALS?<br></div><div><br></div><div><b>Next, in the input file I instruct</b></div><div>&MOTION<br>  &GEO_OPT<br>    MAX_DR    1.0E-03<br>    MAX_FORCE 1.0E-03<br>    RMS_DR    1.0E-03    <br>    RMS_FORCE 1.0E-03<br>    OPTIMIZER CG<br> </div><div></div><div>but, it seems, the output file does not report on the convergence criteria.</div><div><b>Does TDDFPT require additional instruction that such data would be printed</b></div><div><b>or this is out of the scope of the current package?</b></div><div><br></div><div><b>Finally, I see that upon the start:</b></div><div>-                            Excitation analysis                              -<br> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>        State             Occupied              Virtual             Excitation<br>        number             orbital              orbital             amplitude<br> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>             1   3.83221 eV<br>                                15                   16               0.995900<br>                                14                   17              -0.072640<br>             2   4.07218 eV<br>                                15                   17               0.989483<br>                                14                   16              -0.140638<br>             3   5.17410 eV<br>                                14                   16              -0.982529<br>                                15                   17              -0.137943<br>                                15                   18               0.080624<br>                                13                   16              -0.068511<br> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------</div><div><br></div><div><b>while later, upon optimization:<br></b></div>-                            Excitation analysis                              -<br> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>        State             Occupied              Virtual             Excitation<br>        number             orbital              orbital             amplitude<br> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>             1   3.01565 eV<br>                                15                   16              -0.997677<br>             2   3.59856 eV<br>                                15                   17               0.989952<br>                                14                   16              -0.137983<br>             3   4.63370 eV<br>                                14                   16              -0.985780<br>                                15                   17              -0.135202<br>                                15                   18              -0.077828<br> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br><div><br></div><div><b>Since the latter excitation energy  of
3.01565 eV is significantly lower than the initial one of 
3.83221 eV, should the difference of about 0.8eV correspond to the Stokes shift,</b></div><div><b>and the 
3.01565 eV

would be the desired 0'-0 fluorescence energy?</b></div><div><br></div><div>Thank you.</div><div>I hope/wish the users would find my questions valuable.</div><div><br></div><div>With best wishes.</div><div>Victor <br></div><div><br> </div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cp2k" group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to <a href="mailto:cp2k+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">cp2k+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To view this discussion on the web visit <a href="https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cp2k/e9b50a33-7672-4afe-8d9f-a589b2b690d1n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer">https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cp2k/e9b50a33-7672-4afe-8d9f-a589b2b690d1n%40googlegroups.com</a>.<br />