Introduction to
Introduction to
Computational Chemistry
Computational Chemistry
Shubin Liu, Ph.D.
Research Computing Center
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
its.unc.edu 2
Outline
 Introduction
 Methods in Computational Chemistry
•Ab Initio
•Semi-Empirical
•Density Functional Theory
•New Developments (QM/MM)
 Hands-on Exercises
The PPT format of this presentation is available here:
http://its2.unc.edu/divisions/rc/training/scientific/
/afs/isis/depts/its/public_html/divisions/rc/training/scientific/short_courses/
its.unc.edu 3
About Us
 ITS – Information Technology Services
• http://its.unc.edu
• http://help.unc.edu
• Physical locations:
 401 West Franklin St.
 211 Manning Drive
• 10 Divisions/Departments
 Information Security IT Infrastructure and Operations
 Research Computing Center Teaching and Learning
 User Support and Engagement Office of the CIO
 Communication Technologies Communications
 Enterprise Applications Finance and Administration
its.unc.edu 4
Research Computing
 Where and who are we and what do we do?
• ITS Manning: 211 Manning Drive
• Website
http://its.unc.edu/research-computing.html
• Groups
 Infrastructure -- Hardware
 User Support -- Software
 Engagement -- Collaboration
its.unc.edu 5
About Myself
 Ph.D. from Chemistry, UNC-CH
 Currently Senior Computational Scientist @ Research Computing Center, UNC-CH
 Responsibilities:
• Support Computational Chemistry/Physics/Material Science software
• Support Programming (FORTRAN/C/C++) tools, code porting, parallel computing, etc.
• Offer short courses on scientific computing and computational chemistry
• Conduct research and engagement projects in Computational Chemistry
 Development of DFT theory and concept tools
 Applications in biological and material science systems
its.unc.edu 6
About You
 Name, department, research interest?
 Any experience before with high
performance computing?
 Any experience before with
computational chemistry research?
 Do you have any real problem to solve
with computational chemistry
approaches?
its.unc.edu 7
Think BIG!!!
 What is not chemistry?
• From microscopic world, to nanotechnology, to daily life, to
environmental problems
• From life science, to human disease, to drug design
• Only our mind limits its boundary
 What cannot computational chemistry deal with?
• From small molecules, to DNA/proteins, 3D crystals and surfaces
• From species in vacuum, to those in solvent at room temperature,
and to those under extreme conditions (high T/p)
• From structure, to properties, to spectra (UV, IR/Raman, NMR,
VCD), to dynamics, to reactivity
• All experiments done in labs can be done in silico
• Limited only by (super)computers not big/fast enough!
its.unc.edu 8
Central Theme of
Computational Chemistry
DYNAMICS
REACTIVITY
STRUCTURE CENTRAL DOGMA OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
SEQUENCE

STRUCTURE

DYNAMICS

FUNCTION

EVALUTION
its.unc.edu 9
Multiscale Hierarchy of
Modeling
its.unc.edu 10
What is Computational
Chemistry?
Application of computational methods and
algorithms in chemistry
• Quantum Mechanical
i.e., via Schrödinger Equation
also called Quantum Chemistry
• Molecular Mechanical
i.e., via Newton’s law F=ma
also Molecular Dynamics
• Empirical/Statistical
e.g., QSAR, etc., widely used in clinical and medicinal chemistry
Focus Today





 H
t
i ˆ

its.unc.edu 11
How Big Systems Can We
Deal with?
Assuming typical computing setup (number of CPUs,
memory, disk space, etc.)
 Ab initio method: ~100 atoms
 DFT method: ~1000 atoms
 Semi-empirical method: ~10,000 atoms
 MM/MD: ~100,000 atoms
its.unc.edu 12
 
   
 









i
j
n
1
i ij
n
1
i
N
1 i
2
i
2
r
1
r
Z
-
2m
h
-
H
 

  
  



n
i
j
n
1
i ij
n
1
i r
1
i
h
H
Starting Point: Time-Independent
Schrodinger Equation


 E
H





 H
t
i ˆ

its.unc.edu 13
Equation to Solve in
ab initio Theory


 E
H
Known exactly:
3N spatial variables
(N # of electrons)
To be approximated:
1. variationally
2. perturbationally
its.unc.edu 14
Hamiltonian for a Molecule
 kinetic energy of the electrons
 kinetic energy of the nuclei
 electrostatic interaction between the electrons and
the nuclei
 electrostatic interaction between the electrons
 electrostatic interaction between the nuclei


















nuclei
B
A AB
B
A
electrons
j
i ij
nuclei
A iA
A
electrons
i
A
nuclei
A A
i
electrons
i e
R
Z
Z
e
r
e
r
Z
e
m
m
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
ˆ 

H
its.unc.edu 15
Ab Initio Methods
 Accurate treatment of the electronic distribution using the
full Schrödinger equation
 Can be systematically improved to obtain chemical accuracy
 Does not need to be parameterized or calibrated with respect
to experiment
 Can describe structure, properties, energetics and reactivity
 What does “ab intio” mean?
• Start from beginning, with first principle
 Who invented the word of the “ab initio” method?
• Bob Parr of UNC-CH in 1950s; See Int. J. Quantum Chem.
37(4), 327(1990) for details.
its.unc.edu 16
Three Approximations
 Born-Oppenheimer approximation
• Electrons act separately of nuclei, electron and nuclear
coordinates are independent of each other, and thus
simplifying the Schrödinger equation
 Independent particle approximation
• Electrons experience the ‘field’ of all other electrons as
a group, not individually
• Give birth to the concept of “orbital”, e.g., AO, MO, etc.
 LCAO-MO approximation
• Molecular orbitals (MO) can be constructed as linear
combinations of atom orbitals, to form Slater
determinants
its.unc.edu 17
Born-Oppenheimer
Approximation
 the nuclei are much heavier than the electrons and move more slowly than the
electrons
 freeze the nuclear positions (nuclear kinetic energy is zero in the electronic
Hamiltonian)
 calculate the electronic wave function and energy
 E depends on the nuclear positions through the nuclear-electron attraction and
nuclear-nuclear repulsion terms
 E = 0 corresponds to all particles at infinite separation




 








nuclei
B
A AB
B
A
electrons
j
i ij
nuclei
A iA
A
electrons
i
i
electrons
i e
el
r
Z
Z
e
r
e
r
Z
e
m
2
2
2
2
2
2
ˆ 
H












d
d
E
E
el
el
el
el
el
el
el
el *
* ˆ
,
ˆ
H
H
its.unc.edu 18
Approximate Wavefunctions
 Construction of one-electron functions (molecular orbitals,
MO’s) as linear combinations of one-electron atomic basis
functions (AOs)  MO-LCAO approach.
 Construction of N-electron wavefunction as linear
combination of anti-symmetrized products of MOs (these
anti-symmetrized products are denoted as Slater-
determinants).
       










 
 down)
-
(spin
up)
-
(spin
;
1 




 i
i
u i
k
N
k
kl
i
l r
q
its.unc.edu 19
The Slater Determinant
       
               
 
       
       
       
       
        z
c
b
a
z
c
b
a
z
z
z
z
c
c
c
c
b
b
b
b
a
a
a
a
n
z
c
b
a
z
c
b
a
n
z
c
b
a
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n



























































3
2
1
3
2
1
3
2
1
3
2
1
3
2
1
3
1
2
3
2
1
3
2
1
Α̂
!
1
!
1
its.unc.edu 20
The Two Extreme Cases
 One determinant: The Hartree–Fock method.
 All possible determinants: The full CI method.
       
N
N



 
3
2
1 3
2
1
HF 



There are N MOs and each MO is a linear combination of N AOs.
Thus, there are nN coefficients ukl, which are determined by
making stationary the functional:
The ij are Lagrangian multipliers.
  












 
 

N
l
k
ij
lj
kl
ki
N
j
i
ij u
S
u
H
E
1
,
*
1
,
HF
HF
HF
ˆ 

its.unc.edu 21
The Full CI Method
 The full configuration interaction (full CI) method
expands the wavefunction in terms of all possible Slater
determinants:
 There are possible ways to choose n molecular
orbitals from a set of 2N AO basis functions.
 The number of determinants gets easily much too large.
For example:








n
N
2
 




















 



















1
ˆ
;
2
1
,
CI
CI
CI
2
1
CI 






  c
S
c
H
E
c
n
N
*
n
N
9
10
10
40








 Davidson’s method can be used to find one
or a few eigenvalues of a matrix of rank 109
.
its.unc.edu 22
       
N
N



 
3
2
1 3
2
1
HF 



  












 
 

N
l
k
ij
lj
kl
ki
N
j
i
ij u
S
u
H
E
1
,
*
1
,
HF
HF
HF
ˆ 



 














N
i
li
ki
kl
N
l
k
kl
mn
N
n
m
mn u
u
P
nl
mk
P
h
P
E
H
1
*
1
,
2
1
1
,
nuc
HF
HF ;
ˆ
  0
HF 



E
uki
Hartree–Fock equations
The Hartree–Fock Method
its.unc.edu 23
 


 |
S 
Overlap integral
   







  






 |
2
1
|
P
H
F


 i
i
occ
i
c
c

2
P
Density Matrix





  S
F 
  i
i
i c
c
The Hartree–Fock Method
its.unc.edu 24
1. Choose start coefficients for MO’s
2. Construct Fock Matrix with coefficients
3. Solve Hartree-Fock-Roothaan equations
4. Repeat 2 and 3 until ingoing and outgoing
coefficients are the same
Self-Consistent-Field (SCF)





  S
F 
  i
i
i c
c
its.unc.edu 25
Semi-empirical methods
(MNDO, AM1, PM3, etc.)
Full CI
perturbational hierarchy
(CASPT2, CASPT3)
perturbational hierarchy
(MP2, MP3, MP4, …)
excitation hierarchy
(MR-CISD)
excitation hierarchy
(CIS,CISD,CISDT,...)
(CCS, CCSD, CCSDT,...)
Multiconfigurational HF
(MCSCF, CASSCF)
Hartree-Fock
(HF-SCF)
Ab Initio Methods
its.unc.edu 26
Who’s Who
its.unc.edu 27
Size vs Accuracy
Number of atoms
0.1
1
10
1 10 100 1000
Accuracy
(kcal/mol)
Coupled-cluster,
Multireference
Nonlocal density functional,
Perturbation theory
Local density functional,
Hartree-Fock
Semiempirical Methods
Full CI
its.unc.edu 28
ROO,e= 291.2 pm
96.4 pm
95.7 pm 95.8 pm
symmetry: Cs
Equilibrium structure of (H
Equilibrium structure of (H2
2O)
O)2
2
W.K., J.G.C.M. van Duijneveldt-van de Rijdt, and
W.K., J.G.C.M. van Duijneveldt-van de Rijdt, and
F.B. van Duijneveldt,
F.B. van Duijneveldt, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.
Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2
2, 2227 (2000).
, 2227 (2000).
Experimental [J.A. Odutola and T.R. Dyke, J. Chem. Phys 72, 5062 (1980)]:
 ROO
2
½
= 297.6 ± 0.4 pm
SAPT-5s potential [E.M. Mas et al., J. Chem. Phys. 113, 6687 (2000)]:
 ROO
2
½
– ROO,e= 6.3 pm  ROO,e(exptl.) = 291.3 pm
AN EXAMPLE
its.unc.edu 29
Experimental and Computed
Enthalpy Changes He in kJ/mol
Exptl. CCSD(T) SCF G2 DFT
CH4
 CH2 + H2 544(2) 542 492 534 543
C2H4
 C2H2 + H2 203(2) 204 214 202 208
H2CO  CO + H2 21(1) 22  3 17 34
2 NH3
 N2 + 3 H2 164(1) 162 149 147 166
2 H2O  H2O2 + H2 365(2) 365 391 360 346
2 HF  F2 + H2 563(1) 562 619 564 540
Gaussian-2 (G2) method of Pople and co-workers is a combination of MP2 and QCISD(T)
its.unc.edu 30
LCAO  Basis Functions
 ’s, which are atomic orbitals, are called basis
functions
 usually centered on atoms
 can be more general and more flexible than atomic
orbital functions
 larger number of well chosen basis functions yields
more accurate approximations to the molecular orbitals




 
 c
its.unc.edu 31
Basis Functions
 Slaters (STO)
 Gaussians (GTO)
 Angular part *
 Better behaved than Gaussians
 2-electron integrals hard
 2-electron integrals simpler
 Wrong behavior at nucleus
 Decrease too fast with r
r)
exp( 

 
2
n
m
l
r
exp
*
z
y
x 

its.unc.edu 32
Contracted Gaussian Basis Set
 Minimal
STO-nG
 Split Valence: 3-
21G,4-31G, 6-
31G
• Each atom optimized STO is fit with n
GTO’s
• Minimum number of AO’s needed
• Contracted GTO’s optimized per atom
• Doubling of the number of valence AO’s
its.unc.edu 33
Polarization /
Diffuse Functions
 Polarization: Add AO with higher angular
momentum (L) to give more flexibility
Example: 3-21G*, 6-31G*, 6-31G**, etc.
 Diffusion: Add AO with very small exponents for
systems with very diffuse electron densities such
as anions or excited states
Example: 6-31+G*, 6-311++G**
its.unc.edu 34
Correlation-Consistent
Basis Functions
 a family of basis sets of increasing size
 can be used to extrapolate to the basis set limit
 cc-pVDZ – DZ with d’s on heavy atoms, p’s on H
 cc-pVTZ – triple split valence, with 2 sets of d’s and
one set of f’s on heavy atoms, 2 sets of p’s and 1
set of d’s on hydrogen
 cc-pVQZ, cc-pV5Z, cc-pV6Z
 can also be augmented with diffuse functions (aug-
cc-pVXZ)
its.unc.edu 35
Pseudopotentials,
Effective Core Potentials
 core orbitals do not change much during chemical
interactions
 valence orbitals feel the electrostatic potential of the
nuclei and of the core electrons
 can construct a pseudopotential to replace the
electrostatic potential of the nuclei and of the core
electrons
 reduces the size of the basis set needed to represent the
atom (but introduces additional approximations)
 for heavy elements, pseudopotentials can also include of
relativistic effects that otherwise would be costly to treat
its.unc.edu 36
Correlation Energy
 HF does not include correlations anti-parallel electrons
 Eexact – EHF = Ecorrelation
 Post HF Methods:
• Configuration Interaction (CI, MCSCF, CCSD)
• Møller-Plesset Perturbation series (MP2, MP4)
 Density Functional Theory (DFT)
its.unc.edu 37
Configuration-Interaction (CI)
 In Hartree-Fock theory, the n-electron wavefunction is approximated by one single
Slater-determinant, denoted as:
 This determinant is built from n orthonormal spin-orbitals. The spin-orbitals that
form are said to be occupied. The other orthonormal spin-orbitals that follow
from the Hartree-Fock calculation in a given one-electron basis set of atomic orbitals
(AOs) are known as virtual orbitals. For simplicity, we assume that all spin-orbitals
are real.
 In electron-correlation or post-Hartree-Fock methods, the wavefunction is expanded
in a many-electron basis set that consists of many determinants. Sometimes, we only
use a few determinants, and sometimes, we use millions of them:
In this notation, is a Slater-
determinant that is obtained by
replacing a certain number of
occupied orbitals by virtual ones.
 Three questions: 1. Which determinants should we include?
2. How do we determine the expansion coefficients?
3. How do we evaluate the energy (or other properties)?
HF
HF




 
c
HF
CI

its.unc.edu 38
Truncated configuration interaction:
CIS, CISD, CISDT, etc.
 We start with a reference wavefunction, for example the Hartree-
Fock determinant.
 We then select determinants for the wavefunction expansion by
substituting orbitals of the reference determinant by orbitals that
are not occupied in the reference state (virtual orbitals).
 Singles (S) indicate that 1 orbital is replaced, doubles (D) indicate
2 replacements, triples (T) indicate 3 replacements, etc., leading
to CIS, CISD, CISDT, etc.
       
N
N
k
j
i 


 
3
2
1
HF 



                etc.
,
3
2
1
,
3
2
1 N
N N
k
b
a
ab
ij
N
k
j
a
a
i 






 
 



its.unc.edu 39
Truncated
Configuration Interaction
L
ev
elo
f
ex
citatio
n
N
u
m
b
ero
f
p
aram
eters
E
x
am
p
le
C
IS n
(2
N–n
) 3
0
0
C
IS
D …+[n
(2
N–n
)]2
7
8
,6
0
0
C
IS
D
T …
+[n
(2
N–n
)]3
1
8

1
0
6
… … …
F
u
llC
I 







n
N
2 
1
0
9
Number of linear variational parameters
in truncated CI for n = 10 and 2N = 40.
its.unc.edu 40
Multi-Configuration
Self-Consistent Field (MCSCF)
 The MCSCF wavefunctions consists of a few selected determinants or CSFs. In the
MCSCF method, not only the linear weights of the determinants are variationally
optimized, but also the orbital coefficients.
 One important selection is governed by the full CI space spanned by a number of
prescribed active orbitals (complete active space, CAS). This is the CASSCF method.
The CASSCF wavefunction contains all determinants that can be constructed from a
given set of orbitals with the constraint that some specified pairs of - and -spin-
orbitals must occur in all determinants (these are the inactive doubly occupied
spatial orbitals).
 Multireference CI wavefunctions are obtained by applying the excitation operators to
the individual CSFs or determinants of the MCSCF (or CASSCF) reference wave
function.
k
C
C
c
k
k
k
k )
ˆ
ˆ
(
CISD
-
MR 2
1
 

 
 


k
k
k
k
k k
d
C
k
C
c 2
1
ˆ
)
ˆ
(
MRCI
-
IC
Internally-contracted MRCI:
its.unc.edu 41
Coupled-Cluster Theory
 System of equations is solved iteratively (the convergence is
accelerated by utilizing Pulay’s method, “direct inversion in
the iterative subspace”, DIIS).
 CCSDT model is very expensive in terms of computer resources.
Approximations are introduced for the triples: CCSD(T),
CCSD[T], CCSD-T.
 Brueckner coupled-cluster (e.g., BCCD) methods use Brueckner
orbitals that are optimized such that singles don’t contribute.
 By omitting some of the CCSD terms, the quadratic CI method
(e.g., QCISD) is obtained.
its.unc.edu 42
Møller-Plesset
Perturbation Theory
 The Hartree-Fock function is an eigenfunction of the
n-electron operator .
 We apply perturbation theory as usual after decomposing the
Hamiltonian into two parts:
 More complicated with more than one reference determinant
(e.g., MR-PT, CASPT2, CASPT3, …)
F̂
   
 
 
F
H
H
F
H
H
H
H
ˆ
ˆ
ˆ
ˆ
ˆ
ˆ
ˆ
1
0
1
0




 MP2, MP3, MP4, …etc.
number denotes order to which
energy is computed (2n+1 rule)
its.unc.edu 43
Semi-Empirical Methods
 These methods are derived from the Hartee–Fock model, that is,
they are MO-LCAO methods.
 They only consider the valence electrons.
 A minimal basis set is used for the valence shell.
 Integrals are restricted to one- and two-center integrals and
subsequently parametrized by adjusting the computed results to
experimental data.
 Very efficient computational tools, which can yield fast quantitative
estimates for a number of properties. Can be used for establishing
trends in classes of related molecules, and for scanning a
computational poblem before proceeding with high-level treatments.
 A not of elements, especially transition metals, have not be
parametrized
its.unc.edu 44
Semi-Empirical Methods
Number 2-electron integrals () is n4
/8, n = number of basis functions
Treat only valence electrons explicit
Neglect large number of 2-electron integrals
Replace others by empirical parameters
Models:
• Complete Neglect of Differential Overlap (CNDO)
• Intermediate Neglect of Differential Overlap (INDO/MINDO)
• Neglect of Diatomic Differential Overlap (NDDO/MNDO, AM1, PM3)
its.unc.edu 45




A
B
AB
V
U
H 
 Ufrom atomic spectra
Vvalue per atom pair
0
H 
 on the same atom

  S
H AB
  
B
A
AB 2
1 

 

One  parameter per element
Approximations of 1-e
integrals
its.unc.edu 46
Popular DFT
 Noble prize in Chemistry, 1998
 In 1999, 3 of top 5 most cited journal
articles in chemistry (1st
, 2nd
, & 4th
)
 In 2000-2003, top 3 most cited journal
articles in chemistry
 In 2004-2005, 4 of top 5 most cited
journal articles in chemistry:
• 1st, Becke’s hybrid exchange
functional (1993)
• 2nd, LYP correlation functional (1988)
• 3rd
, Becke’s exchange functional
(1988)
• 4th
, PBE correlation functional (1996)
http://www.cas.org/spotlight/bchem.html
Citations of DFT on JCP, JACS and PRL
its.unc.edu 47
Brief History of DFT
 First speculated 1920’
•Thomas-Fermi (kinetic energy) and Dirac
(exchange energy) formulas
 Officially born in 1964 with Hohenberg-
Kohn’s original proof
 GEA/GGA formulas available later 1980’
 Becoming popular later 1990’
 Pinnacled in 1998 with a chemistry Nobel
prize
its.unc.edu 48
What could expect from DFT?
 LDA, ~20 kcal/mol error in energy
 GGA, ~3-5 kcal/mol error in energy
 G2/G3 level, some systems, ~1kcal/mol
 Good at structure, spectra, & other
properties predictions
 Poor in H-containing systems, TS, spin,
excited states, etc.
its.unc.edu 49
Density Functional Theory
 Two Hohenberg-Kohn theorems:
•“Given the external potential, we know the
ground-state energy of the molecule when we
know the electron density ”.
•The energy density functional is variational.
 






 
E
Ĥ
Energy
its.unc.edu 50
But what is E[]?
 How do we compute the energy if the density is known?
 The Coulombic interactions are easy to compute:
 But what about the kinetic energy TS[] and exchange-
correlation energy Exc[]?
        ,
]
[
,
]
[
,
]
[ 2
1
ext
ne
nn r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r 





 
 

d
d
J
d
V
E
r
Z
Z
E
nuclei
B
A AB
B
A 





E[] = TS[] + Vne[] + J[] + Vnn[] + Exc[]
its.unc.edu 51
Kohn-Sham Scheme
,
|
)
(
|
)
(
,
)
(
,
|
|
)
(
)
(
,
|
|
)
(
,
2
1
and
)
(
)
(
)
(
ˆ
where
,
ˆ
2
3
2
























nk
nk
nk
xc
xc
ee
a a
a
ne
xc
ee
ne
nk
nk
nk
r
f
r
E
r
V
r
d
r
r
r
r
V
R
r
Z
r
V
K
r
V
r
V
r
V
K
H
H





The Only
Unknown
• Suppose, we know the
exact density.
• Then, we can formulate a
Slater determinant that
generates this exact density
(= Slater determinant of
system of N non-interacting
electrons with same density
).
• We know how to compute
the kinetic energy Ts
exactly from a Slater
determinant.
• Then, the only thing
unknown is to calculate
Exc[].
its.unc.edu 52
All about Exchange-Correlation
Energy Density Functional
 LDA – f(r) is a function of (r)
only
 GGA – f(r) is a function of (r)
and |∇(r)|
 Mega-GGA – f(r) is also a
function of ts(r), kinetic
energy density
 Hybrid – f(r) is GGA functional
with extra contribution from
Hartree-Fock exchange energy
     
  r
r
r
r d
f
QXC  
 
,
,
, 2



Jacob's ladder for the five generation of DFT functionals,
according to the vision of John Perdew with indication of
some of the most common DFT functionals within each rung.
its.unc.edu 53
LDA Functionals
 Thomas-Fermi formula (Kinetic) – 1
parameter
 Slater form (exchange) – 1 parameter
 Wigner correlation – 2 parameters
      3
/
2
2
3
/
5
3
10
3
, 

 
  F
F
TF C
d
C
T r
r
    3
/
1
3
/
2
3
/
1
3
/
4
4
3
8
3
, 

  

 X
X
S
X C
d
C
E r
r
   
 
r
r
r
 

 d
b
a
EW
C 3
/
1
1 


its.unc.edu 54
Popular Functional: BLYP/B3LYP
Two most well-known functionals are the Becke exchange functional
Ex[] with 2 extra parameters & 
The Lee-Yang-Parr correlation functional Ec[] with 4 parameters a-d
Together, they constitute the BLYP functional:
The B3LYP functional is augmented with 20% of Hartree-Fock
exchange:
        r
r
r
r d
e
d
e
E
E
E c
x
c
x
xc 




 




 
 ,
, LYP
B
LYP
B
BLYP
  3
/
4
2
2
2
3
/
4
,
1 











 
LDA
X
B
X E
E
  r
d
e
t
t
C
b
d
a
E c
W
W
F
LYP
c  





























3
/
1
2
3
/
5
3
/
2
3
/
1
18
1
9
1
2
1
1 






nl
km
P
P
b
E
E
a
E
N
l
k
kl
N
n
m
mn
c
x
xc 
 




1
,
1
,
LYP
B
B3LYP
its.unc.edu 55
Density Functionals
LDA
local density
GGA
gradient corrected
Meta-GGA
kinetic energy density
included
Hybrid
“exact” HF exchange
component
Hybrid-meta-GGA
VWN5
BLYP
HCTH
BP86
TPSS
M06-L
B3LYP
B97/2
MPW1K
MPWB1K
M06
Better scaling with system
size
Allow density fitting for
even
better scaling
Meta-GGA is “bleeding
edge” and therefore
largely untested (but
better in theory…)
Hybrid makes bigger
difference in cost and
accuracy
Look at literature if
somebody
has compared functionals
for
systems similar to yours!
Increasing
quality
and
computational
cost
its.unc.edu 56
Percentage of occurrences of the names of the several functionals indicated in Table 2, in
journal titles and abstracts, analyzed from the ISI Web of Science (2007).
S.F. Sousa, P.A. Fernandes and M.J. Ramos, J. Phys. Chem. A 10.1021/jp0734474 S1089-5639(07)03447-0
Density Functionals
its.unc.edu 57
Problems with DFT
 ground-state theory only
 universal functional still unknown
 even hydrogen atom a problem: self-interaction
correction
 no systematic way to improve approximations like LDA,
GGA, etc.
 extension to excited states, spin multiplets, etc., though
proven exact in theory, is not trivial in implementation
and still far from being generally accessible thus far
its.unc.edu 58
DFT Developments
 Theoretical
• Extensions to excited states, etc.
• Better functionals (mega-GGA), etc
• Understanding functional properties, etc.
 Conceptual
• More concepts proposed, like electrophilicity, philicity, spin-
philicity, surfaced-integrated Fukui fnc
• Dynamic behaviors, profiles, etc.
 Computational
• Linear scaling methods
• QM/MM related issues
• Applications
its.unc.edu 59
Examples DFT vs. HF
Hydrogen molecules - using the LSDA (LDA)
its.unc.edu 60
Chemical Reactivity Theory
Chemical reactivity theory quantifies the reactive propensity of
isolated species through the introduction of a set of reactivity indices
or descriptors. Its roots go deep into the history of chemistry, as far
back as the introduction of such fundamental concepts as acid, base,
Lewis acid, Lewis base, etc. It pervades almost all of chemistry.
 Molecular Orbital Theory
• Fukui’s Frontier Orbital (HOMO/LUMO) model
• Woodward-Hoffman rules
• Well developed: Nobel prize in Chemistry, 1981
• Problem: conceptual simplicity disappears as computational
accuracy increases because it’s based on the molecular orbital
description
 Density Functional Theory (DFT)
• Conceptual DFT, also called Chemical DFT, DF Reactivity Theory
• Proposed by Robert G. Parr of UNC-CH, 1980s
• Still in development
-- Morrel H. Cohen, and Adam Wasserman, J. Phys. Chem. A 2007, 111,2229
its.unc.edu 61
DFT Reactivity Theory
 General Consideration
• E  E [N, (r)]  E []
• Taylor Expansion: Perturbation resulted from an
external attacking agent leading to changes in N and
(r), N and (r),
   
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
   













































































 

'
'
2
!
,
,
2
2
2
2
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
2
1
r
r
r
r
r
r
2
d
d
E
d
N
E
N
N
N
E
d
E
N
N
E
N
E
N
N
E
E
N
N
N

















Assumptions: existence and well-behavior of all above partial/functional derivatives
its.unc.edu 62
Conceptual DFT
 Basic assumptions
•E  E [N, (r)]  E []
•Chemical processes, responses, and changes
expressible via Taylor expansion
•Existence, continuous, and well-behavedness
of the partial derivatives
its.unc.edu 63
DFT Reactivity Indices
 Electronegativity (chemical potential)
 Hardness / Softness
 Maximum Hardness Principle (MHP)
 HSAB (hard and Soft Acid and Base) Principle





/
1
,
2
2
1
2
2













 S
N
E HOMO
LUMO
2
LUMO
HOMO
N
E 















its.unc.edu 64
DFT Reactivity Indices
 Fukui
function    











N
f
r
r
– Nucleophilic attack
     
r
r
r N
N
f 
 
 

1
– Electrophilic attack
     
r
r
r 1



 N
N
f 

– Free radical activity
     
2
r
r
r




f
f
f
its.unc.edu 65
Electrophilicity Index
Physical meaning: suppose an electrophile is immersed in
an electron sea
The maximal electron flow and accompanying energy
decrease are
2
2
1
N
N
E 



 



2
2
max 

N



2
2







2
2
min
E Parr, Szentpaly, Liu, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 121, 1922(1999).
its.unc.edu 66
Experiment vs. Theory
Pérez, P. J. Org. Chem. 2003, 68, 5886. Pérez, P.; Aizman, A.; Contreras, R. J. Phys. Chem. A 2002, 106, 3964.



2
2

log
(k)
=
s(E+N)
its.unc.edu 67
Minimum Electrophilicity Principle
 Analogous to the maximum hardness principle (MHP)
 Separately proposed by Noorizadeh and Chattaraj
 Concluded that “the natural direction of a chemical reaction is
toward a state of minimum electrophilicity.”
Noorizadeh, S. Chin. J. Chem. 2007, 25, 1439.
Noorizadeh, S. J. Phys. Org. Chem. 2007, 20, 514.
Chattaraj, P.K. Ind. J. Phys. Proc. Ind. Natl. Sci. Acad. Part A 2007, 81, 871.
non-
LA
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Aa
-0.091 -
0.085
-0.093 -0.093 -
0.088
-0.087 -0.083 -0.090
Bb
-0.089 -
0.084
-0.088 -0.089 -
0.087
-0.087 -0.0842 -
0.0892
Aa
-0.172 -
0.247
-0.230 -0.220 -
0.218
-0.226 -0.2518 -
0.2161
Bb
-0.171 -
0.246
-0.247 -0.233 -
0.221
-0.226 -0.2506 -
0.2157
Yue Xia, Dulin Yin, Chunying Rong, Qiong Xu, Donghong Yin, and Shubin Liu, J. Phys. Chem. A, 2008, 112, 9970.
its.unc.edu 68
Nucleophilicity
 Much harder to quantify, because it related to local
hardness, which is ambiguous in definition.
 A nucleophile can be a good donor for one electrophile
but bad for another, leading to the difficulty to define a
universal scale of nucleophilicity for an nucleophile.
A
B
A
B
A






2
2
1












Jaramillo, P.; Perez, P.; Contreras, R.; Tiznado, W.; Fuentealba, P. J. Phys. Chem. A 2006, 110, 8181.
 = -N - ½ S()2
Minimizing  in Eq. (14) with respect to ,
one has
=-N and  = - ½ N2
.
Making use of the following relation
B
A
B
A
N







its.unc.edu 69
Philicity and Fugality
 Philicity: defined as ·f(r)
• Chattaraj, Maiti, & Sarkar, J. Phys. Chem. A 107, 4973(2003)
• Still a very controversial concept, see JPCA 108, 4934(2004);
Chattaraj, et al. JPCA, in press.
 Spin-Philicity: defined same as  but in spin resolution
• Perez, Andres, Safont, Tapia, & Contreras. J. Phys. Chem. A 106,
5353(2002)
 Nuclofugality & Electrofugality




2
)
( 2





 A
En




2
)
( 2




 I
Ee
Ayers, P.W.; Anderson, J.S.M.; Rodriguez, J.I.; Jawed, Z. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2005, 7,
1918.
Ayers, P.W.; Anderson, J S.M.; Bartolotti, L.J. Int. J. Quantum Chem. 2005, 101, 520.
its.unc.edu 70
Dual Descriptors
  
   
 
  N
N
N
N
f
N
E
E
N
f 























































r
r
r
r
r









2
2
2
2
2
3rd
-order cross-term derivatives
   0
2

 r
r d
f
      
r
r
r 


 f
f
f 2       
r
r
r HOMO
LUMO
f 
 

2
Recovering Woodward-Hoffman rules!
Ayers, P.W.; Morell, C., De Proft, D.; Geerlings, P. Chem. Eur. J., 2007, 13, 8240
Geerling, P. De Proft F. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2008, 10, 3028
its.unc.edu 71
Steric Effect
one of the most widely used concepts
in chemistry
originates from the space occupied by
atom in a molecule
previous work attributed to the
electron exchange correlation
Weisskopf thought of as “kinetic
energy pressure”
Weisskopf, V.F., Science 187, 605-612(1975).
its.unc.edu 72
Steric effect: a DFT description
Assume
since
we have
E[] ≡ Es[] + Ee[] + Eq[]
E[] = Ts[] + Vne[] + J[] + Vnn[] + Exc[]
Ee[] = Vne[] + J[] + Vnn[]
Eq[] = Exc[] + EPauli[] = Exc[] + Ts[] - Tw[]
Es[] ≡ E[] - Ee[] - Eq[] = Tw[]
 
 
 


 r
r
r
d
TW



2
8
1
S.B. Liu, J. Chem. Phys. 2007, 126, 244103.
S.B. Liu and N. Govind, J. Phys. Chem. A 2008, 112, 6690.
S.B. Liu, N. Govind, and L.G. Pedersen, J. Chem. Phys. 2008, 129, 094104.
M. Torrent-Sucarrat, S.B. Liu and F. De Proft, J. Phys. Chem. A 2009, 113, 3698.
its.unc.edu 73
 In 1956, Taft constructed a scale for the steric effect of different substituents,
based on rate constants for the acid-catalyzed hydrolysis of esters in aqueous
acetone. It was shown that log(k / k0) was insensitive to polar effects and thus,
in the absence of resonance interactions, this value can be considered as being
proportional to steric effects. Hydrogen is taken to have a reference value of
EsTaft
= 0
Experiment vs. Theory
its.unc.edu 74
QM/MM Example:
Triosephosphate Isomerase (TIM)
494 Residues, 4033 Atoms, PDB ID: 7TIM
Function: DHAP (dihydroxyacetone phosphate) GAP (glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate)
GAP
DHAP
H2O
its.unc.edu 75
Glu 165 (the catalytic base), His 95 (the proton shuttle)
DHAP GAP
TIM 2-step 2-residue Mechanism
its.unc.edu 76
QM/MM: 1st Step of TIM
Mechanism
QM/MM size: 6051 atoms QM Size: 37 atoms
QM: Gaussian’98 Method: HF/3-21G
MM: Tinker Force field: AMBER all-atom
Number of Water: 591 Model for Water: TIP3P
MD details: 20x20x20 Å3
box, optimize until the RMS energy
gradient less than 1.0 kcal/mol/Å. 20 psec MD. Time step 2fs.
SHAKE, 300 K, short range cutoff 8 Å, long range cutoff 15 Å.
its.unc.edu 77
QM/MM: Transition State
=====================
Energy Barrier (kcal/mol)
------------------------------------
-
QM/MM 21.9
Experiment 14.0
=====================
its.unc.edu 78
What’s New: Linear Scaling
O(N) Method
 Numerical Bottlenecks:
• diagonalization ~N3
• orthonormalization ~N3
• matrix element evaluation ~N2
-N4
 Computational Complexity: N log N
 Theoretical Basis: near-sightedness of density
matrix or orbitals
 Strategy:
• sparsity of localized orbital or density
matrix
• direct minimization with conjugate
gradient
 Models: divide-and-conquer and variational
methods
 Applicability: ~10,000 atoms, dynamics
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Atoms
C
P
U
s
ec
o
n
d
s
p
e
r
C
G
s
tep
OLMO
NOLMO
Diagonalization
its.unc.edu 79
What Else … ?
 Solvent effect
•Implicit model vs. explicit model
 Relativity effect
 Transition state
 Excited states
 Temperature and pressure
 Solid states (periodic boundary condition)
 Dynamics (time-dependent)
its.unc.edu 80
Limitations and Strengths
of ab initio quantum
chemistry
its.unc.edu 81
Popular QM codes
Gaussian (Ab Initio, Semi-empirical, DFT)
Gamess-US/UK (Ab Initio, DFT)
Spartan (Ab Initio, Semi-empirical, DFT)
NWChem (Ab Initio, DFT, MD, QM/MM)
MOPAC/2000 (Semi-Empirical)
DMol3
/CASTEP (DFT)
Molpro (Ab initio)
ADF (DFT)
ORCA (DFT)
its.unc.edu 82
Reference Books
 Computational Chemistry (Oxford Chemistry Primer) G. H.
Grant and W. G. Richards (Oxford University Press)
 Molecular Modeling – Principles and Applications, A. R. Leach
(Addison Wesley Longman)
 Introduction to Computational Chemistry, F. Jensen (Wiley)
 Essentials of Computational Chemistry – Theories and Models,
C. J. Cramer (Wiley)
 Exploring Chemistry with Electronic Structure Methods, J. B.
Foresman and A. Frisch (Gaussian Inc.)
its.unc.edu 83
Questions & Comments
Please direct comments/questions about research computing to
E-mail: research@unc.edu
Please direct comments/questions pertaining to this presentation to
E-Mail: shubin@email.unc.edu
The PPT format of this presentation is available here:
http://its2.unc.edu/divisions/rc/training/scientific/
/afs/isis/depts/its/public_html/divisions/rc/training/scientific/short_courses/
its.unc.edu 84
Hands-on: Part I
Purpose: to get to know the available ab
initio and semi-empirical methods in the
Gaussian 03 / GaussView package
• ab initio methods
 Hartree-Fock
 MP2
 CCSD
• Semiempirical methods
 AM1
The WORD .doc format of this hands-on exercises is available here:
http://its2.unc.edu/divisions/rc/training/scientific/
/afs/isis/depts/its/public_html/divisions/rc/training/scientific/short_courses/labDirections_compchem_2009.doc
its.unc.edu 85
Hands-on: Part II
Purpose: To use LDA and GGA DFT methods to
calculate IR/Raman spectra in vacuum and in
solvent. To build QM/MM models and then use
DFT methods to calculate IR/Raman spectra
• DFT
 LDA (SVWN)
 GGA (B3LYP)
• QM/MM

More Related Content

PPT
COPUTATIONAL CHEMISTRY.ppt
PPT
IntroductiontoCompChemistry-basic introduc
PPT
IntroductiontoCompChem_2009.ppt
PPT
IntroductiontoCompChem_2009.ppt
PPT
IntroductiontoCompChem_2009.ppt
PPT
IntroductiontoCompChem_2009 computational chemistry .ppt
PDF
Basics of Quantum and Computational Chemistry
PDF
Applications of Computational Quantum Chemistry
COPUTATIONAL CHEMISTRY.ppt
IntroductiontoCompChemistry-basic introduc
IntroductiontoCompChem_2009.ppt
IntroductiontoCompChem_2009.ppt
IntroductiontoCompChem_2009.ppt
IntroductiontoCompChem_2009 computational chemistry .ppt
Basics of Quantum and Computational Chemistry
Applications of Computational Quantum Chemistry

Similar to IntroductiontoCompChem_2009.pptbbbbbbbbbbb (20)

PPT
Computional quantum chemistry study .ppt
PPT
Introduction to Computational Quantum Chemistry.ppt
PPT
Intro. to quantum chemistry
PPT
Intro-QM-Chem.ppt
PPT
Intro-QM-Chem.ppt
PPT
Density Functional Theory
PPT
Introduction to Computational chemistry-
PPTX
computational pnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnpt.pptx
PPT
computationalchemistry_12-6.ppt
PPTX
Quantum Chemistry II
PPTX
Quantum calculations and calculational chemistry
PPT
Anand's presentation
PDF
Lecture_No._2_Computational_Chemistry_Tools___Application_of_computational_me...
PPTX
Molecular modelling
PPTX
computational chemistry reading notes reading
PPTX
theoretical chemistry study materia.pptx
PDF
Computational Chemistry- An Introduction
PPTX
molecular orbital theory quantum mechanics
PPTX
Hartree-Fock Review
Computional quantum chemistry study .ppt
Introduction to Computational Quantum Chemistry.ppt
Intro. to quantum chemistry
Intro-QM-Chem.ppt
Intro-QM-Chem.ppt
Density Functional Theory
Introduction to Computational chemistry-
computational pnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnpt.pptx
computationalchemistry_12-6.ppt
Quantum Chemistry II
Quantum calculations and calculational chemistry
Anand's presentation
Lecture_No._2_Computational_Chemistry_Tools___Application_of_computational_me...
Molecular modelling
computational chemistry reading notes reading
theoretical chemistry study materia.pptx
Computational Chemistry- An Introduction
molecular orbital theory quantum mechanics
Hartree-Fock Review
Ad

More from HaroonRashid107275 (16)

PPT
134-ch-substitution-reactions.ppt bbbbbbb
PPT
IntroductiontoCompChem_2009.ppt nnbvbvcxfg
PPTX
Strengths of Lewis Acids and Bases n.pptx
PPT
substituents effects on the bacicities of amines.ppt
PPTX
bhupenderppt601-210609050016.pptx bvbnb vccf bv
PPTX
Ijaz Ali.pptx bn bnv vhm vhgn bhgcbn bhvgv
PPT
Ch1_Basic_concepts_Organic_sem1.ppt bv c xvbbb
PPTX
aiandtheresearcher-230215154854-ad3503b1.pptx
PPTX
aiandtheresearcher-230215154854-ad3503b1.pptx
PPT
15343328.pptggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
PPT
19_06_12.html.ppt nnn nbv ,lkj kll kjh kj
PPT
magrad_plagbc.ppt vvv vvv vff fff ffff ff
PPT
jklo jkmnb kjhh jkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk
PPT
Nuclear Magnetic Resonance in Organic Chemistry [Autosaved].ppt
PPT
stereochemistryII.ppt
PPT
Isomerism .ppt
134-ch-substitution-reactions.ppt bbbbbbb
IntroductiontoCompChem_2009.ppt nnbvbvcxfg
Strengths of Lewis Acids and Bases n.pptx
substituents effects on the bacicities of amines.ppt
bhupenderppt601-210609050016.pptx bvbnb vccf bv
Ijaz Ali.pptx bn bnv vhm vhgn bhgcbn bhvgv
Ch1_Basic_concepts_Organic_sem1.ppt bv c xvbbb
aiandtheresearcher-230215154854-ad3503b1.pptx
aiandtheresearcher-230215154854-ad3503b1.pptx
15343328.pptggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
19_06_12.html.ppt nnn nbv ,lkj kll kjh kj
magrad_plagbc.ppt vvv vvv vff fff ffff ff
jklo jkmnb kjhh jkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk
Nuclear Magnetic Resonance in Organic Chemistry [Autosaved].ppt
stereochemistryII.ppt
Isomerism .ppt
Ad

Recently uploaded (20)

PDF
medical_surgical_nursing_10th_edition_ignatavicius_TEST_BANK_pdf.pdf
PPTX
Introduction to pro and eukaryotes and differences.pptx
PDF
David L Page_DCI Research Study Journey_how Methodology can inform one's prac...
PDF
International_Financial_Reporting_Standa.pdf
PDF
1.3 FINAL REVISED K-10 PE and Health CG 2023 Grades 4-10 (1).pdf
PDF
FOISHS ANNUAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2025.pdf
PDF
BP 704 T. NOVEL DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEMS (UNIT 1)
PDF
Τίμαιος είναι φιλοσοφικός διάλογος του Πλάτωνα
PPTX
20th Century Theater, Methods, History.pptx
PDF
AI-driven educational solutions for real-life interventions in the Philippine...
PPTX
Computer Architecture Input Output Memory.pptx
PPTX
Virtual and Augmented Reality in Current Scenario
PDF
Weekly quiz Compilation Jan -July 25.pdf
PPTX
202450812 BayCHI UCSC-SV 20250812 v17.pptx
PDF
Empowerment Technology for Senior High School Guide
PDF
Practical Manual AGRO-233 Principles and Practices of Natural Farming
PDF
MBA _Common_ 2nd year Syllabus _2021-22_.pdf
PDF
Vision Prelims GS PYQ Analysis 2011-2022 www.upscpdf.com.pdf
PPTX
B.Sc. DS Unit 2 Software Engineering.pptx
PDF
advance database management system book.pdf
medical_surgical_nursing_10th_edition_ignatavicius_TEST_BANK_pdf.pdf
Introduction to pro and eukaryotes and differences.pptx
David L Page_DCI Research Study Journey_how Methodology can inform one's prac...
International_Financial_Reporting_Standa.pdf
1.3 FINAL REVISED K-10 PE and Health CG 2023 Grades 4-10 (1).pdf
FOISHS ANNUAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2025.pdf
BP 704 T. NOVEL DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEMS (UNIT 1)
Τίμαιος είναι φιλοσοφικός διάλογος του Πλάτωνα
20th Century Theater, Methods, History.pptx
AI-driven educational solutions for real-life interventions in the Philippine...
Computer Architecture Input Output Memory.pptx
Virtual and Augmented Reality in Current Scenario
Weekly quiz Compilation Jan -July 25.pdf
202450812 BayCHI UCSC-SV 20250812 v17.pptx
Empowerment Technology for Senior High School Guide
Practical Manual AGRO-233 Principles and Practices of Natural Farming
MBA _Common_ 2nd year Syllabus _2021-22_.pdf
Vision Prelims GS PYQ Analysis 2011-2022 www.upscpdf.com.pdf
B.Sc. DS Unit 2 Software Engineering.pptx
advance database management system book.pdf

IntroductiontoCompChem_2009.pptbbbbbbbbbbb

  • 1. Introduction to Introduction to Computational Chemistry Computational Chemistry Shubin Liu, Ph.D. Research Computing Center University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
  • 2. its.unc.edu 2 Outline  Introduction  Methods in Computational Chemistry •Ab Initio •Semi-Empirical •Density Functional Theory •New Developments (QM/MM)  Hands-on Exercises The PPT format of this presentation is available here: http://its2.unc.edu/divisions/rc/training/scientific/ /afs/isis/depts/its/public_html/divisions/rc/training/scientific/short_courses/
  • 3. its.unc.edu 3 About Us  ITS – Information Technology Services • http://its.unc.edu • http://help.unc.edu • Physical locations:  401 West Franklin St.  211 Manning Drive • 10 Divisions/Departments  Information Security IT Infrastructure and Operations  Research Computing Center Teaching and Learning  User Support and Engagement Office of the CIO  Communication Technologies Communications  Enterprise Applications Finance and Administration
  • 4. its.unc.edu 4 Research Computing  Where and who are we and what do we do? • ITS Manning: 211 Manning Drive • Website http://its.unc.edu/research-computing.html • Groups  Infrastructure -- Hardware  User Support -- Software  Engagement -- Collaboration
  • 5. its.unc.edu 5 About Myself  Ph.D. from Chemistry, UNC-CH  Currently Senior Computational Scientist @ Research Computing Center, UNC-CH  Responsibilities: • Support Computational Chemistry/Physics/Material Science software • Support Programming (FORTRAN/C/C++) tools, code porting, parallel computing, etc. • Offer short courses on scientific computing and computational chemistry • Conduct research and engagement projects in Computational Chemistry  Development of DFT theory and concept tools  Applications in biological and material science systems
  • 6. its.unc.edu 6 About You  Name, department, research interest?  Any experience before with high performance computing?  Any experience before with computational chemistry research?  Do you have any real problem to solve with computational chemistry approaches?
  • 7. its.unc.edu 7 Think BIG!!!  What is not chemistry? • From microscopic world, to nanotechnology, to daily life, to environmental problems • From life science, to human disease, to drug design • Only our mind limits its boundary  What cannot computational chemistry deal with? • From small molecules, to DNA/proteins, 3D crystals and surfaces • From species in vacuum, to those in solvent at room temperature, and to those under extreme conditions (high T/p) • From structure, to properties, to spectra (UV, IR/Raman, NMR, VCD), to dynamics, to reactivity • All experiments done in labs can be done in silico • Limited only by (super)computers not big/fast enough!
  • 8. its.unc.edu 8 Central Theme of Computational Chemistry DYNAMICS REACTIVITY STRUCTURE CENTRAL DOGMA OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY SEQUENCE  STRUCTURE  DYNAMICS  FUNCTION  EVALUTION
  • 10. its.unc.edu 10 What is Computational Chemistry? Application of computational methods and algorithms in chemistry • Quantum Mechanical i.e., via Schrödinger Equation also called Quantum Chemistry • Molecular Mechanical i.e., via Newton’s law F=ma also Molecular Dynamics • Empirical/Statistical e.g., QSAR, etc., widely used in clinical and medicinal chemistry Focus Today       H t i ˆ 
  • 11. its.unc.edu 11 How Big Systems Can We Deal with? Assuming typical computing setup (number of CPUs, memory, disk space, etc.)  Ab initio method: ~100 atoms  DFT method: ~1000 atoms  Semi-empirical method: ~10,000 atoms  MM/MD: ~100,000 atoms
  • 12. its.unc.edu 12                  i j n 1 i ij n 1 i N 1 i 2 i 2 r 1 r Z - 2m h - H             n i j n 1 i ij n 1 i r 1 i h H Starting Point: Time-Independent Schrodinger Equation    E H       H t i ˆ 
  • 13. its.unc.edu 13 Equation to Solve in ab initio Theory    E H Known exactly: 3N spatial variables (N # of electrons) To be approximated: 1. variationally 2. perturbationally
  • 14. its.unc.edu 14 Hamiltonian for a Molecule  kinetic energy of the electrons  kinetic energy of the nuclei  electrostatic interaction between the electrons and the nuclei  electrostatic interaction between the electrons  electrostatic interaction between the nuclei                   nuclei B A AB B A electrons j i ij nuclei A iA A electrons i A nuclei A A i electrons i e R Z Z e r e r Z e m m 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ˆ   H
  • 15. its.unc.edu 15 Ab Initio Methods  Accurate treatment of the electronic distribution using the full Schrödinger equation  Can be systematically improved to obtain chemical accuracy  Does not need to be parameterized or calibrated with respect to experiment  Can describe structure, properties, energetics and reactivity  What does “ab intio” mean? • Start from beginning, with first principle  Who invented the word of the “ab initio” method? • Bob Parr of UNC-CH in 1950s; See Int. J. Quantum Chem. 37(4), 327(1990) for details.
  • 16. its.unc.edu 16 Three Approximations  Born-Oppenheimer approximation • Electrons act separately of nuclei, electron and nuclear coordinates are independent of each other, and thus simplifying the Schrödinger equation  Independent particle approximation • Electrons experience the ‘field’ of all other electrons as a group, not individually • Give birth to the concept of “orbital”, e.g., AO, MO, etc.  LCAO-MO approximation • Molecular orbitals (MO) can be constructed as linear combinations of atom orbitals, to form Slater determinants
  • 17. its.unc.edu 17 Born-Oppenheimer Approximation  the nuclei are much heavier than the electrons and move more slowly than the electrons  freeze the nuclear positions (nuclear kinetic energy is zero in the electronic Hamiltonian)  calculate the electronic wave function and energy  E depends on the nuclear positions through the nuclear-electron attraction and nuclear-nuclear repulsion terms  E = 0 corresponds to all particles at infinite separation               nuclei B A AB B A electrons j i ij nuclei A iA A electrons i i electrons i e el r Z Z e r e r Z e m 2 2 2 2 2 2 ˆ  H             d d E E el el el el el el el el * * ˆ , ˆ H H
  • 18. its.unc.edu 18 Approximate Wavefunctions  Construction of one-electron functions (molecular orbitals, MO’s) as linear combinations of one-electron atomic basis functions (AOs)  MO-LCAO approach.  Construction of N-electron wavefunction as linear combination of anti-symmetrized products of MOs (these anti-symmetrized products are denoted as Slater- determinants).                      down) - (spin up) - (spin ; 1       i i u i k N k kl i l r q
  • 19. its.unc.edu 19 The Slater Determinant                                                                   z c b a z c b a z z z z c c c c b b b b a a a a n z c b a z c b a n z c b a n n n n n n n n                                                            3 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 1 2 3 2 1 3 2 1 Α̂ ! 1 ! 1
  • 20. its.unc.edu 20 The Two Extreme Cases  One determinant: The Hartree–Fock method.  All possible determinants: The full CI method.         N N      3 2 1 3 2 1 HF     There are N MOs and each MO is a linear combination of N AOs. Thus, there are nN coefficients ukl, which are determined by making stationary the functional: The ij are Lagrangian multipliers.                     N l k ij lj kl ki N j i ij u S u H E 1 , * 1 , HF HF HF ˆ  
  • 21. its.unc.edu 21 The Full CI Method  The full configuration interaction (full CI) method expands the wavefunction in terms of all possible Slater determinants:  There are possible ways to choose n molecular orbitals from a set of 2N AO basis functions.  The number of determinants gets easily much too large. For example:         n N 2                                            1 ˆ ; 2 1 , CI CI CI 2 1 CI          c S c H E c n N * n N 9 10 10 40          Davidson’s method can be used to find one or a few eigenvalues of a matrix of rank 109 .
  • 22. its.unc.edu 22         N N      3 2 1 3 2 1 HF                         N l k ij lj kl ki N j i ij u S u H E 1 , * 1 , HF HF HF ˆ                     N i li ki kl N l k kl mn N n m mn u u P nl mk P h P E H 1 * 1 , 2 1 1 , nuc HF HF ; ˆ   0 HF     E uki Hartree–Fock equations The Hartree–Fock Method
  • 23. its.unc.edu 23      | S  Overlap integral                      | 2 1 | P H F    i i occ i c c  2 P Density Matrix        S F    i i i c c The Hartree–Fock Method
  • 24. its.unc.edu 24 1. Choose start coefficients for MO’s 2. Construct Fock Matrix with coefficients 3. Solve Hartree-Fock-Roothaan equations 4. Repeat 2 and 3 until ingoing and outgoing coefficients are the same Self-Consistent-Field (SCF)        S F    i i i c c
  • 25. its.unc.edu 25 Semi-empirical methods (MNDO, AM1, PM3, etc.) Full CI perturbational hierarchy (CASPT2, CASPT3) perturbational hierarchy (MP2, MP3, MP4, …) excitation hierarchy (MR-CISD) excitation hierarchy (CIS,CISD,CISDT,...) (CCS, CCSD, CCSDT,...) Multiconfigurational HF (MCSCF, CASSCF) Hartree-Fock (HF-SCF) Ab Initio Methods
  • 27. its.unc.edu 27 Size vs Accuracy Number of atoms 0.1 1 10 1 10 100 1000 Accuracy (kcal/mol) Coupled-cluster, Multireference Nonlocal density functional, Perturbation theory Local density functional, Hartree-Fock Semiempirical Methods Full CI
  • 28. its.unc.edu 28 ROO,e= 291.2 pm 96.4 pm 95.7 pm 95.8 pm symmetry: Cs Equilibrium structure of (H Equilibrium structure of (H2 2O) O)2 2 W.K., J.G.C.M. van Duijneveldt-van de Rijdt, and W.K., J.G.C.M. van Duijneveldt-van de Rijdt, and F.B. van Duijneveldt, F.B. van Duijneveldt, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2 2, 2227 (2000). , 2227 (2000). Experimental [J.A. Odutola and T.R. Dyke, J. Chem. Phys 72, 5062 (1980)]:  ROO 2 ½ = 297.6 ± 0.4 pm SAPT-5s potential [E.M. Mas et al., J. Chem. Phys. 113, 6687 (2000)]:  ROO 2 ½ – ROO,e= 6.3 pm  ROO,e(exptl.) = 291.3 pm AN EXAMPLE
  • 29. its.unc.edu 29 Experimental and Computed Enthalpy Changes He in kJ/mol Exptl. CCSD(T) SCF G2 DFT CH4  CH2 + H2 544(2) 542 492 534 543 C2H4  C2H2 + H2 203(2) 204 214 202 208 H2CO  CO + H2 21(1) 22  3 17 34 2 NH3  N2 + 3 H2 164(1) 162 149 147 166 2 H2O  H2O2 + H2 365(2) 365 391 360 346 2 HF  F2 + H2 563(1) 562 619 564 540 Gaussian-2 (G2) method of Pople and co-workers is a combination of MP2 and QCISD(T)
  • 30. its.unc.edu 30 LCAO  Basis Functions  ’s, which are atomic orbitals, are called basis functions  usually centered on atoms  can be more general and more flexible than atomic orbital functions  larger number of well chosen basis functions yields more accurate approximations to the molecular orbitals        c
  • 31. its.unc.edu 31 Basis Functions  Slaters (STO)  Gaussians (GTO)  Angular part *  Better behaved than Gaussians  2-electron integrals hard  2-electron integrals simpler  Wrong behavior at nucleus  Decrease too fast with r r) exp(     2 n m l r exp * z y x  
  • 32. its.unc.edu 32 Contracted Gaussian Basis Set  Minimal STO-nG  Split Valence: 3- 21G,4-31G, 6- 31G • Each atom optimized STO is fit with n GTO’s • Minimum number of AO’s needed • Contracted GTO’s optimized per atom • Doubling of the number of valence AO’s
  • 33. its.unc.edu 33 Polarization / Diffuse Functions  Polarization: Add AO with higher angular momentum (L) to give more flexibility Example: 3-21G*, 6-31G*, 6-31G**, etc.  Diffusion: Add AO with very small exponents for systems with very diffuse electron densities such as anions or excited states Example: 6-31+G*, 6-311++G**
  • 34. its.unc.edu 34 Correlation-Consistent Basis Functions  a family of basis sets of increasing size  can be used to extrapolate to the basis set limit  cc-pVDZ – DZ with d’s on heavy atoms, p’s on H  cc-pVTZ – triple split valence, with 2 sets of d’s and one set of f’s on heavy atoms, 2 sets of p’s and 1 set of d’s on hydrogen  cc-pVQZ, cc-pV5Z, cc-pV6Z  can also be augmented with diffuse functions (aug- cc-pVXZ)
  • 35. its.unc.edu 35 Pseudopotentials, Effective Core Potentials  core orbitals do not change much during chemical interactions  valence orbitals feel the electrostatic potential of the nuclei and of the core electrons  can construct a pseudopotential to replace the electrostatic potential of the nuclei and of the core electrons  reduces the size of the basis set needed to represent the atom (but introduces additional approximations)  for heavy elements, pseudopotentials can also include of relativistic effects that otherwise would be costly to treat
  • 36. its.unc.edu 36 Correlation Energy  HF does not include correlations anti-parallel electrons  Eexact – EHF = Ecorrelation  Post HF Methods: • Configuration Interaction (CI, MCSCF, CCSD) • Møller-Plesset Perturbation series (MP2, MP4)  Density Functional Theory (DFT)
  • 37. its.unc.edu 37 Configuration-Interaction (CI)  In Hartree-Fock theory, the n-electron wavefunction is approximated by one single Slater-determinant, denoted as:  This determinant is built from n orthonormal spin-orbitals. The spin-orbitals that form are said to be occupied. The other orthonormal spin-orbitals that follow from the Hartree-Fock calculation in a given one-electron basis set of atomic orbitals (AOs) are known as virtual orbitals. For simplicity, we assume that all spin-orbitals are real.  In electron-correlation or post-Hartree-Fock methods, the wavefunction is expanded in a many-electron basis set that consists of many determinants. Sometimes, we only use a few determinants, and sometimes, we use millions of them: In this notation, is a Slater- determinant that is obtained by replacing a certain number of occupied orbitals by virtual ones.  Three questions: 1. Which determinants should we include? 2. How do we determine the expansion coefficients? 3. How do we evaluate the energy (or other properties)? HF HF       c HF CI 
  • 38. its.unc.edu 38 Truncated configuration interaction: CIS, CISD, CISDT, etc.  We start with a reference wavefunction, for example the Hartree- Fock determinant.  We then select determinants for the wavefunction expansion by substituting orbitals of the reference determinant by orbitals that are not occupied in the reference state (virtual orbitals).  Singles (S) indicate that 1 orbital is replaced, doubles (D) indicate 2 replacements, triples (T) indicate 3 replacements, etc., leading to CIS, CISD, CISDT, etc.         N N k j i      3 2 1 HF                     etc. , 3 2 1 , 3 2 1 N N N k b a ab ij N k j a a i              
  • 39. its.unc.edu 39 Truncated Configuration Interaction L ev elo f ex citatio n N u m b ero f p aram eters E x am p le C IS n (2 N–n ) 3 0 0 C IS D …+[n (2 N–n )]2 7 8 ,6 0 0 C IS D T … +[n (2 N–n )]3 1 8  1 0 6 … … … F u llC I         n N 2  1 0 9 Number of linear variational parameters in truncated CI for n = 10 and 2N = 40.
  • 40. its.unc.edu 40 Multi-Configuration Self-Consistent Field (MCSCF)  The MCSCF wavefunctions consists of a few selected determinants or CSFs. In the MCSCF method, not only the linear weights of the determinants are variationally optimized, but also the orbital coefficients.  One important selection is governed by the full CI space spanned by a number of prescribed active orbitals (complete active space, CAS). This is the CASSCF method. The CASSCF wavefunction contains all determinants that can be constructed from a given set of orbitals with the constraint that some specified pairs of - and -spin- orbitals must occur in all determinants (these are the inactive doubly occupied spatial orbitals).  Multireference CI wavefunctions are obtained by applying the excitation operators to the individual CSFs or determinants of the MCSCF (or CASSCF) reference wave function. k C C c k k k k ) ˆ ˆ ( CISD - MR 2 1          k k k k k k d C k C c 2 1 ˆ ) ˆ ( MRCI - IC Internally-contracted MRCI:
  • 41. its.unc.edu 41 Coupled-Cluster Theory  System of equations is solved iteratively (the convergence is accelerated by utilizing Pulay’s method, “direct inversion in the iterative subspace”, DIIS).  CCSDT model is very expensive in terms of computer resources. Approximations are introduced for the triples: CCSD(T), CCSD[T], CCSD-T.  Brueckner coupled-cluster (e.g., BCCD) methods use Brueckner orbitals that are optimized such that singles don’t contribute.  By omitting some of the CCSD terms, the quadratic CI method (e.g., QCISD) is obtained.
  • 42. its.unc.edu 42 Møller-Plesset Perturbation Theory  The Hartree-Fock function is an eigenfunction of the n-electron operator .  We apply perturbation theory as usual after decomposing the Hamiltonian into two parts:  More complicated with more than one reference determinant (e.g., MR-PT, CASPT2, CASPT3, …) F̂         F H H F H H H H ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ 1 0 1 0      MP2, MP3, MP4, …etc. number denotes order to which energy is computed (2n+1 rule)
  • 43. its.unc.edu 43 Semi-Empirical Methods  These methods are derived from the Hartee–Fock model, that is, they are MO-LCAO methods.  They only consider the valence electrons.  A minimal basis set is used for the valence shell.  Integrals are restricted to one- and two-center integrals and subsequently parametrized by adjusting the computed results to experimental data.  Very efficient computational tools, which can yield fast quantitative estimates for a number of properties. Can be used for establishing trends in classes of related molecules, and for scanning a computational poblem before proceeding with high-level treatments.  A not of elements, especially transition metals, have not be parametrized
  • 44. its.unc.edu 44 Semi-Empirical Methods Number 2-electron integrals () is n4 /8, n = number of basis functions Treat only valence electrons explicit Neglect large number of 2-electron integrals Replace others by empirical parameters Models: • Complete Neglect of Differential Overlap (CNDO) • Intermediate Neglect of Differential Overlap (INDO/MINDO) • Neglect of Diatomic Differential Overlap (NDDO/MNDO, AM1, PM3)
  • 45. its.unc.edu 45     A B AB V U H   Ufrom atomic spectra Vvalue per atom pair 0 H   on the same atom    S H AB    B A AB 2 1      One  parameter per element Approximations of 1-e integrals
  • 46. its.unc.edu 46 Popular DFT  Noble prize in Chemistry, 1998  In 1999, 3 of top 5 most cited journal articles in chemistry (1st , 2nd , & 4th )  In 2000-2003, top 3 most cited journal articles in chemistry  In 2004-2005, 4 of top 5 most cited journal articles in chemistry: • 1st, Becke’s hybrid exchange functional (1993) • 2nd, LYP correlation functional (1988) • 3rd , Becke’s exchange functional (1988) • 4th , PBE correlation functional (1996) http://www.cas.org/spotlight/bchem.html Citations of DFT on JCP, JACS and PRL
  • 47. its.unc.edu 47 Brief History of DFT  First speculated 1920’ •Thomas-Fermi (kinetic energy) and Dirac (exchange energy) formulas  Officially born in 1964 with Hohenberg- Kohn’s original proof  GEA/GGA formulas available later 1980’  Becoming popular later 1990’  Pinnacled in 1998 with a chemistry Nobel prize
  • 48. its.unc.edu 48 What could expect from DFT?  LDA, ~20 kcal/mol error in energy  GGA, ~3-5 kcal/mol error in energy  G2/G3 level, some systems, ~1kcal/mol  Good at structure, spectra, & other properties predictions  Poor in H-containing systems, TS, spin, excited states, etc.
  • 49. its.unc.edu 49 Density Functional Theory  Two Hohenberg-Kohn theorems: •“Given the external potential, we know the ground-state energy of the molecule when we know the electron density ”. •The energy density functional is variational.           E Ĥ Energy
  • 50. its.unc.edu 50 But what is E[]?  How do we compute the energy if the density is known?  The Coulombic interactions are easy to compute:  But what about the kinetic energy TS[] and exchange- correlation energy Exc[]?         , ] [ , ] [ , ] [ 2 1 ext ne nn r r r r r r r r r            d d J d V E r Z Z E nuclei B A AB B A       E[] = TS[] + Vne[] + J[] + Vnn[] + Exc[]
  • 51. its.unc.edu 51 Kohn-Sham Scheme , | ) ( | ) ( , ) ( , | | ) ( ) ( , | | ) ( , 2 1 and ) ( ) ( ) ( ˆ where , ˆ 2 3 2                         nk nk nk xc xc ee a a a ne xc ee ne nk nk nk r f r E r V r d r r r r V R r Z r V K r V r V r V K H H      The Only Unknown • Suppose, we know the exact density. • Then, we can formulate a Slater determinant that generates this exact density (= Slater determinant of system of N non-interacting electrons with same density ). • We know how to compute the kinetic energy Ts exactly from a Slater determinant. • Then, the only thing unknown is to calculate Exc[].
  • 52. its.unc.edu 52 All about Exchange-Correlation Energy Density Functional  LDA – f(r) is a function of (r) only  GGA – f(r) is a function of (r) and |∇(r)|  Mega-GGA – f(r) is also a function of ts(r), kinetic energy density  Hybrid – f(r) is GGA functional with extra contribution from Hartree-Fock exchange energy         r r r r d f QXC     , , , 2    Jacob's ladder for the five generation of DFT functionals, according to the vision of John Perdew with indication of some of the most common DFT functionals within each rung.
  • 53. its.unc.edu 53 LDA Functionals  Thomas-Fermi formula (Kinetic) – 1 parameter  Slater form (exchange) – 1 parameter  Wigner correlation – 2 parameters       3 / 2 2 3 / 5 3 10 3 ,       F F TF C d C T r r     3 / 1 3 / 2 3 / 1 3 / 4 4 3 8 3 ,        X X S X C d C E r r       r r r     d b a EW C 3 / 1 1   
  • 54. its.unc.edu 54 Popular Functional: BLYP/B3LYP Two most well-known functionals are the Becke exchange functional Ex[] with 2 extra parameters &  The Lee-Yang-Parr correlation functional Ec[] with 4 parameters a-d Together, they constitute the BLYP functional: The B3LYP functional is augmented with 20% of Hartree-Fock exchange:         r r r r d e d e E E E c x c x xc               , , LYP B LYP B BLYP   3 / 4 2 2 2 3 / 4 , 1               LDA X B X E E   r d e t t C b d a E c W W F LYP c                                3 / 1 2 3 / 5 3 / 2 3 / 1 18 1 9 1 2 1 1        nl km P P b E E a E N l k kl N n m mn c x xc        1 , 1 , LYP B B3LYP
  • 55. its.unc.edu 55 Density Functionals LDA local density GGA gradient corrected Meta-GGA kinetic energy density included Hybrid “exact” HF exchange component Hybrid-meta-GGA VWN5 BLYP HCTH BP86 TPSS M06-L B3LYP B97/2 MPW1K MPWB1K M06 Better scaling with system size Allow density fitting for even better scaling Meta-GGA is “bleeding edge” and therefore largely untested (but better in theory…) Hybrid makes bigger difference in cost and accuracy Look at literature if somebody has compared functionals for systems similar to yours! Increasing quality and computational cost
  • 56. its.unc.edu 56 Percentage of occurrences of the names of the several functionals indicated in Table 2, in journal titles and abstracts, analyzed from the ISI Web of Science (2007). S.F. Sousa, P.A. Fernandes and M.J. Ramos, J. Phys. Chem. A 10.1021/jp0734474 S1089-5639(07)03447-0 Density Functionals
  • 57. its.unc.edu 57 Problems with DFT  ground-state theory only  universal functional still unknown  even hydrogen atom a problem: self-interaction correction  no systematic way to improve approximations like LDA, GGA, etc.  extension to excited states, spin multiplets, etc., though proven exact in theory, is not trivial in implementation and still far from being generally accessible thus far
  • 58. its.unc.edu 58 DFT Developments  Theoretical • Extensions to excited states, etc. • Better functionals (mega-GGA), etc • Understanding functional properties, etc.  Conceptual • More concepts proposed, like electrophilicity, philicity, spin- philicity, surfaced-integrated Fukui fnc • Dynamic behaviors, profiles, etc.  Computational • Linear scaling methods • QM/MM related issues • Applications
  • 59. its.unc.edu 59 Examples DFT vs. HF Hydrogen molecules - using the LSDA (LDA)
  • 60. its.unc.edu 60 Chemical Reactivity Theory Chemical reactivity theory quantifies the reactive propensity of isolated species through the introduction of a set of reactivity indices or descriptors. Its roots go deep into the history of chemistry, as far back as the introduction of such fundamental concepts as acid, base, Lewis acid, Lewis base, etc. It pervades almost all of chemistry.  Molecular Orbital Theory • Fukui’s Frontier Orbital (HOMO/LUMO) model • Woodward-Hoffman rules • Well developed: Nobel prize in Chemistry, 1981 • Problem: conceptual simplicity disappears as computational accuracy increases because it’s based on the molecular orbital description  Density Functional Theory (DFT) • Conceptual DFT, also called Chemical DFT, DF Reactivity Theory • Proposed by Robert G. Parr of UNC-CH, 1980s • Still in development -- Morrel H. Cohen, and Adam Wasserman, J. Phys. Chem. A 2007, 111,2229
  • 61. its.unc.edu 61 DFT Reactivity Theory  General Consideration • E  E [N, (r)]  E [] • Taylor Expansion: Perturbation resulted from an external attacking agent leading to changes in N and (r), N and (r),                                                                                                         ' ' 2 ! , , 2 2 2 2 r r r r r r r r 2 1 r r r r r r 2 d d E d N E N N N E d E N N E N E N N E E N N N                  Assumptions: existence and well-behavior of all above partial/functional derivatives
  • 62. its.unc.edu 62 Conceptual DFT  Basic assumptions •E  E [N, (r)]  E [] •Chemical processes, responses, and changes expressible via Taylor expansion •Existence, continuous, and well-behavedness of the partial derivatives
  • 63. its.unc.edu 63 DFT Reactivity Indices  Electronegativity (chemical potential)  Hardness / Softness  Maximum Hardness Principle (MHP)  HSAB (hard and Soft Acid and Base) Principle      / 1 , 2 2 1 2 2               S N E HOMO LUMO 2 LUMO HOMO N E                
  • 64. its.unc.edu 64 DFT Reactivity Indices  Fukui function                N f r r – Nucleophilic attack       r r r N N f       1 – Electrophilic attack       r r r 1     N N f   – Free radical activity       2 r r r     f f f
  • 65. its.unc.edu 65 Electrophilicity Index Physical meaning: suppose an electrophile is immersed in an electron sea The maximal electron flow and accompanying energy decrease are 2 2 1 N N E          2 2 max   N    2 2        2 2 min E Parr, Szentpaly, Liu, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 121, 1922(1999).
  • 66. its.unc.edu 66 Experiment vs. Theory Pérez, P. J. Org. Chem. 2003, 68, 5886. Pérez, P.; Aizman, A.; Contreras, R. J. Phys. Chem. A 2002, 106, 3964.    2 2  log (k) = s(E+N)
  • 67. its.unc.edu 67 Minimum Electrophilicity Principle  Analogous to the maximum hardness principle (MHP)  Separately proposed by Noorizadeh and Chattaraj  Concluded that “the natural direction of a chemical reaction is toward a state of minimum electrophilicity.” Noorizadeh, S. Chin. J. Chem. 2007, 25, 1439. Noorizadeh, S. J. Phys. Org. Chem. 2007, 20, 514. Chattaraj, P.K. Ind. J. Phys. Proc. Ind. Natl. Sci. Acad. Part A 2007, 81, 871. non- LA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Aa -0.091 - 0.085 -0.093 -0.093 - 0.088 -0.087 -0.083 -0.090 Bb -0.089 - 0.084 -0.088 -0.089 - 0.087 -0.087 -0.0842 - 0.0892 Aa -0.172 - 0.247 -0.230 -0.220 - 0.218 -0.226 -0.2518 - 0.2161 Bb -0.171 - 0.246 -0.247 -0.233 - 0.221 -0.226 -0.2506 - 0.2157 Yue Xia, Dulin Yin, Chunying Rong, Qiong Xu, Donghong Yin, and Shubin Liu, J. Phys. Chem. A, 2008, 112, 9970.
  • 68. its.unc.edu 68 Nucleophilicity  Much harder to quantify, because it related to local hardness, which is ambiguous in definition.  A nucleophile can be a good donor for one electrophile but bad for another, leading to the difficulty to define a universal scale of nucleophilicity for an nucleophile. A B A B A       2 2 1             Jaramillo, P.; Perez, P.; Contreras, R.; Tiznado, W.; Fuentealba, P. J. Phys. Chem. A 2006, 110, 8181.  = -N - ½ S()2 Minimizing  in Eq. (14) with respect to , one has =-N and  = - ½ N2 . Making use of the following relation B A B A N       
  • 69. its.unc.edu 69 Philicity and Fugality  Philicity: defined as ·f(r) • Chattaraj, Maiti, & Sarkar, J. Phys. Chem. A 107, 4973(2003) • Still a very controversial concept, see JPCA 108, 4934(2004); Chattaraj, et al. JPCA, in press.  Spin-Philicity: defined same as  but in spin resolution • Perez, Andres, Safont, Tapia, & Contreras. J. Phys. Chem. A 106, 5353(2002)  Nuclofugality & Electrofugality     2 ) ( 2       A En     2 ) ( 2      I Ee Ayers, P.W.; Anderson, J.S.M.; Rodriguez, J.I.; Jawed, Z. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2005, 7, 1918. Ayers, P.W.; Anderson, J S.M.; Bartolotti, L.J. Int. J. Quantum Chem. 2005, 101, 520.
  • 70. its.unc.edu 70 Dual Descriptors            N N N N f N E E N f                                                         r r r r r          2 2 2 2 2 3rd -order cross-term derivatives    0 2   r r d f        r r r     f f f 2        r r r HOMO LUMO f     2 Recovering Woodward-Hoffman rules! Ayers, P.W.; Morell, C., De Proft, D.; Geerlings, P. Chem. Eur. J., 2007, 13, 8240 Geerling, P. De Proft F. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2008, 10, 3028
  • 71. its.unc.edu 71 Steric Effect one of the most widely used concepts in chemistry originates from the space occupied by atom in a molecule previous work attributed to the electron exchange correlation Weisskopf thought of as “kinetic energy pressure” Weisskopf, V.F., Science 187, 605-612(1975).
  • 72. its.unc.edu 72 Steric effect: a DFT description Assume since we have E[] ≡ Es[] + Ee[] + Eq[] E[] = Ts[] + Vne[] + J[] + Vnn[] + Exc[] Ee[] = Vne[] + J[] + Vnn[] Eq[] = Exc[] + EPauli[] = Exc[] + Ts[] - Tw[] Es[] ≡ E[] - Ee[] - Eq[] = Tw[]          r r r d TW    2 8 1 S.B. Liu, J. Chem. Phys. 2007, 126, 244103. S.B. Liu and N. Govind, J. Phys. Chem. A 2008, 112, 6690. S.B. Liu, N. Govind, and L.G. Pedersen, J. Chem. Phys. 2008, 129, 094104. M. Torrent-Sucarrat, S.B. Liu and F. De Proft, J. Phys. Chem. A 2009, 113, 3698.
  • 73. its.unc.edu 73  In 1956, Taft constructed a scale for the steric effect of different substituents, based on rate constants for the acid-catalyzed hydrolysis of esters in aqueous acetone. It was shown that log(k / k0) was insensitive to polar effects and thus, in the absence of resonance interactions, this value can be considered as being proportional to steric effects. Hydrogen is taken to have a reference value of EsTaft = 0 Experiment vs. Theory
  • 74. its.unc.edu 74 QM/MM Example: Triosephosphate Isomerase (TIM) 494 Residues, 4033 Atoms, PDB ID: 7TIM Function: DHAP (dihydroxyacetone phosphate) GAP (glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate) GAP DHAP H2O
  • 75. its.unc.edu 75 Glu 165 (the catalytic base), His 95 (the proton shuttle) DHAP GAP TIM 2-step 2-residue Mechanism
  • 76. its.unc.edu 76 QM/MM: 1st Step of TIM Mechanism QM/MM size: 6051 atoms QM Size: 37 atoms QM: Gaussian’98 Method: HF/3-21G MM: Tinker Force field: AMBER all-atom Number of Water: 591 Model for Water: TIP3P MD details: 20x20x20 Å3 box, optimize until the RMS energy gradient less than 1.0 kcal/mol/Å. 20 psec MD. Time step 2fs. SHAKE, 300 K, short range cutoff 8 Å, long range cutoff 15 Å.
  • 77. its.unc.edu 77 QM/MM: Transition State ===================== Energy Barrier (kcal/mol) ------------------------------------ - QM/MM 21.9 Experiment 14.0 =====================
  • 78. its.unc.edu 78 What’s New: Linear Scaling O(N) Method  Numerical Bottlenecks: • diagonalization ~N3 • orthonormalization ~N3 • matrix element evaluation ~N2 -N4  Computational Complexity: N log N  Theoretical Basis: near-sightedness of density matrix or orbitals  Strategy: • sparsity of localized orbital or density matrix • direct minimization with conjugate gradient  Models: divide-and-conquer and variational methods  Applicability: ~10,000 atoms, dynamics 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Atoms C P U s ec o n d s p e r C G s tep OLMO NOLMO Diagonalization
  • 79. its.unc.edu 79 What Else … ?  Solvent effect •Implicit model vs. explicit model  Relativity effect  Transition state  Excited states  Temperature and pressure  Solid states (periodic boundary condition)  Dynamics (time-dependent)
  • 80. its.unc.edu 80 Limitations and Strengths of ab initio quantum chemistry
  • 81. its.unc.edu 81 Popular QM codes Gaussian (Ab Initio, Semi-empirical, DFT) Gamess-US/UK (Ab Initio, DFT) Spartan (Ab Initio, Semi-empirical, DFT) NWChem (Ab Initio, DFT, MD, QM/MM) MOPAC/2000 (Semi-Empirical) DMol3 /CASTEP (DFT) Molpro (Ab initio) ADF (DFT) ORCA (DFT)
  • 82. its.unc.edu 82 Reference Books  Computational Chemistry (Oxford Chemistry Primer) G. H. Grant and W. G. Richards (Oxford University Press)  Molecular Modeling – Principles and Applications, A. R. Leach (Addison Wesley Longman)  Introduction to Computational Chemistry, F. Jensen (Wiley)  Essentials of Computational Chemistry – Theories and Models, C. J. Cramer (Wiley)  Exploring Chemistry with Electronic Structure Methods, J. B. Foresman and A. Frisch (Gaussian Inc.)
  • 83. its.unc.edu 83 Questions & Comments Please direct comments/questions about research computing to E-mail: research@unc.edu Please direct comments/questions pertaining to this presentation to E-Mail: shubin@email.unc.edu The PPT format of this presentation is available here: http://its2.unc.edu/divisions/rc/training/scientific/ /afs/isis/depts/its/public_html/divisions/rc/training/scientific/short_courses/
  • 84. its.unc.edu 84 Hands-on: Part I Purpose: to get to know the available ab initio and semi-empirical methods in the Gaussian 03 / GaussView package • ab initio methods  Hartree-Fock  MP2  CCSD • Semiempirical methods  AM1 The WORD .doc format of this hands-on exercises is available here: http://its2.unc.edu/divisions/rc/training/scientific/ /afs/isis/depts/its/public_html/divisions/rc/training/scientific/short_courses/labDirections_compchem_2009.doc
  • 85. its.unc.edu 85 Hands-on: Part II Purpose: To use LDA and GGA DFT methods to calculate IR/Raman spectra in vacuum and in solvent. To build QM/MM models and then use DFT methods to calculate IR/Raman spectra • DFT  LDA (SVWN)  GGA (B3LYP) • QM/MM

Editor's Notes

  • #1: This is the first session of a seriers of trainings on computational chemistry. The purpose of this session is to give a general idea of how the current framework of computational chemistry looks like, what kinds of methods are available and what we can do with them.
  • #2: After a brief introduction of what computational chemistry is about, we will focus today on one of the three major pieces of computational chemistry methods, namely approaches based on solving time-independent Schroedinger equation. Three major directions, ab initio, semi-empirical, and density functional theory, will be introduced. At the end, we will briefly mention two new developments, i.e., QM/MM and linear scaling methods.
  • #8: The central dogma (or theme) of computational chemistry, I think, is to try to understand following topics of any given molecular system. We are interested to understand its geometric and electronic structures first. After the structures are understood, we want to investigate its dynamic properties, how it behaves when it is put in certain environment like temperature, magnetic field, etc. More importantly, we wish to know what its potential energy surface looks like and how it behaves with it, especially when a chemical reaction takes place.
  • #9: Other than a single molecules, computational chemistry methods are able to deal with a spectrum of problems with a spectrum of theoretical/computational approaches. For systems within the angstrom range, quantum mechanics is the choice. At the nano-micrometer level, molecular dynamics approach is the alternative. As the system size increases, we go through MESO and FEM kingdoms. Notice that between QM and MD regions, we do see an overlap. This is where the QM/MM method plays a role.
  • #10: So what is computational chemistry? No consensus has been available as to how to define it. It could be either narrowly/specifically or broadly defined. I prefer to define it as a discipline where following three components are included: QM, MD and statistical/empirical methods, each of which is based on a completely different methodology and way/algorithm of solving problems. Today, we only deal with the first component, quantum mechanics, based on the so-called Schrödinger equation.
  • #11: For the QM method, given the current computing capability of a typical US university, such as that in UNC-Chapel Hill or ECU, how large molecular systems can we handle? It depends. Different levels of QM approaches can deal with different sizes of systems.
  • #12: With this B-O approximation, we come to the time-independent Schrödinger equation, where the Hamiltonian includes variables from electrons only, whereas nuclei coordinates come in only as parameters.
  • #13: This is the equation for all ab initio, semi-empirical and density functional theory methods to solve. H is the Hamiltonian of the system and Psi is its total electronic wavefunction, each of which has 3N spatial variables and N spin variables, a total of 4N, where N is the number of electrons.
  • #18: Except for the one-electron case, the time-independent Schrödinger equation cannot be solved explicitly and exactly. So applications are needed for many-electron atoms and molecules. Notice that Hamiltonian can always be explicitly obtained for any system, so approximations come in for the total electron wavefunction. The first well-known approximation is the molecular orbital, which is indeed an one-electron wavefunction approximated by the linear combination of atomic orbitals (LCAO). To built an approximate N-electron total wavefunction, we start from a set of MOs, form products, and then anti-symmetrize them as required by the fact that electrons are fermions.
  • #19: One way, if not the ONLY way, to form such an anti-symmetrized MO products is the Slater determinant, with which everyone knows that if one row or column permutates with another, the sign of the determinant is changed. This is the reason why this kind of determinant is anti-symmetrized.
  • #20: With the Slater determinant as the building block to approximate the total electron wavefunction, many approximate levels of theory/computation can be derived. There are two extreme cases, one with only one Slater determinant and the other with as many Slater determinants as possible (as a linear combination). We call the first (simplest theory level) the Hartree-Fock method, and the second the Full Configuration Interaction (Full CI, or FCI in short) method.
  • #21: Let’s talk about the most complicated case first. In the Full CI method, the total N-electron wave function is approximated/expanded by a combination of all possible determinants. For
  • #22: The other extreme case is where one only works work one single determinant, the Hartree-Fock method. Given the approximate wavefunction PSI, and the total energy of the system from the wavefunction, the solution point is reached when the following variational process comes to the point where all energy derivatives with respect to the variables (LCAO coefficients) vanish.
  • #23: The resultant solution is then a matrix equation, called Hartree-Fock-Roothaan Equation, with the overlap, density and Fock matrices defined explicitly in terms of the atomic basis space.
  • #24: To solve the Hartree-Fock-Roothaan equation, self-consistent-field procedure is employed, where one starts from a trial solution, builds a Fock matrix, and then diagonizes it to find the eigen functions to start the next iteration. The process keeps going on until the energy and/or density differences between two steps are less than certain criteria.
  • #25: Here is the diagram to visually illustrates all ab initio methods and the relationship among them. Sitting in the middle is the Hartree-Fock method, and at the bottom is the Full CI method. There exists two ways to go from H-F method to FCI, one via perturbation theories such as MPn and CASPTn, and the other via variational approaches like CI, MCSCF, CASSCF, etc. Notice that I also listed semi-empirical approaches here because they are also based on the single Slater determinant with the minimum basis set.
  • #26: Here are the most prominent people who have contributed to the development of both quantum mechanical ab initio and density functional methods.
  • #27: This plot shows the correlation, given the present available computing capacity, between the system size and the obtained result accuracy. Shown on the curves are the available computational approaches for the particular system size and corresponding accuracy.
  • #28: Here is an example. For small systems of this size, only two water molecules, water dimer, the theoretical result accuracy can be very good, comparable to what one can obtain from experiments. In this particular case, theoretical prediction of O-O distance is 2.912 A, whereas experimentally it is 2.913A.
  • #29: This table shows another aspect of theoretical prediction, on reaction enthalpy of typical small molecule reactions. Theoretical results, especially those from the CCSD(T) method, agree very well with experimental data.
  • #31: To build approximate molecular orbitals for the Slater determinant via the so-called LCAO (linear combination of atomic orbitals) scheme, we need to know atomic orbitals. This is the place we now know where the concept of basis sets comes in, where one knows predefined basis functions to represent atomic orbitals. Two basic categories of basis functions are available, STO (Slater-type orbital) and GTO (Gaussian-type orbital). The advantage of STO is its better behavior in approximate real electrons, especially in the long range but it’s computationally very costly, whereas for GTO, though not very good in describing electron at nuclei cusps and at the long range, it is more computationally efficient. This is why GTO has been the choice for most of ab initio calculations.
  • #32: A compromise is in the following scenario: an atomic orbital is still represented by an STO, but then the STO is expanded by a set of GTOs. Two such popular examples is the so-called minimum basis set, STO-nG, where one STO is expanded by n GTO functions, and the split-valence basis set, such as 6-31G, where for inner shells atomic orbitals are expanded with n=6 GTOs, but for the outer valence shell each atomic orbital is represented by two (splitted) sets of GTOs, one expanded by 3 GTOs and the other by only one GTO.
  • #33: Two kinds of functions can be added/appended to the standard basis set, polarization and diffusion. A polarization function, denoted by * (added to non-H elements) or **(added to both non-H and H, and thus all elements), adds AOs with higher angular momentum to give more flexibility for a basis set. A diffusion function, represented by + (added to for non-H elements) and ++ (to all elements), adds AOs with very small exponents so that they decay very slowly. This latter function is important for such systems as anions and excited states.
  • #36: Electron correlation has two kinds, static (Fermi, parallel-spin, exchange) and dynamic (Columbic, anti-parallel spin). The static electron correlation is accounted for by the exchange interaction between parallel-spin electrons, whereas for the dynamic correlation effect, post-Hartree-Fock methods have to be employed. The conventional way of defining the dynamic electron correlation energy is the difference between the “exact” energy of the system and its Hartree-Fock limit energy. In ab initio theory, two approaches are available to calculate the correlation energy, one via configuration interaction and the other through perturbation theory. Of course, one can also get it in the density functional theory.
  • #37: To correctly describe the instantaneous interaction of electrons, the inter-electron distance must be introduced. The most conceptually simple way of achieving this is via Configuration Interaction (CI). CI uses a wavefunction which is a linear combination of the HF determinant and determinants from excitations of electrons. In the CI method, more than one Slater determinant are used to approximate the total electron wave function and uses the Hartree-Fock theory as its reference. In front of each of the extra configurations (determinants), there is an associated coefficient to measure the extent/importance of the extra configuration. These extra determinants are obtained from exciting one or more electrons form the ground-state Hartree-Fock configuration. So in principle there could be millions or even billions of ways to compose additional Slater determinants. Following three questions remain: which determinants should be included; how to determine the coefficients, and to how to calculate the total electron energy and other properties. The CI expansion is variational and, if the expansion is complete (Full CI), gives the exact correlation energy (within the basis set approximation). The number of determinants in Full CI grows exponentially with the system size, making the method impractical for all but the smallest systems.
  • #38: Since it’s impossible to include all possible determinants in the CI method, we need develop schemes to have truncated CI methods, that is, only a limited number of determinants are included. Here are some ways: start from the Hartree-Fock reference determinant, then excite 1 electron from the occupied orbital to a virtual (unoccupied) orbital to compose a CI approached called CIS (that is, electrons are singly excited). There are many possibilities that one electron can be excited from an occupied orbital. All these possibilities are combined together to form the set of determinants for the CIS method. Next, we allow both 1 and 2 electrons to be simultaneously excited to coin the CISD method, in which linear combination of all possible singly and doubly excited configurations (determinants) forms the approximation for the total wave function. Again, if we allow singly, doubly and triply excited states in the theory, then we can the CISDT approach. Brillouin's Theorem states that singly excited determinants do not mix with the HF determinant. Therefore CISD is the cheapest worthwhile form of CI, yet this method scales as O(N6) where N is the size of the system. The other main problem with truncated CI is that it is not size consistent. For CISD, an approximate way to correct for these effects is to introduce the Davidson correction.
  • #39: This slide shows how large the number of different levels of configurations can be. Say, the system has 10 electrons and a total of 40 basis functions, the total number of single excitation is 300. So at the level of CIS, a total of 300 configurations will be included in the linear combination. At the next level, CISD, the number goes up to 78,600 and at CISDT level, the total number of possible configurations is 18 million. If all possible excitation is considered, that is, at the FCI level, the number is about 1 billion!
  • #40: A different strategy is used for the multi-configuration self-consistent-field (MCSCF) method where not only the linear weights of the determinants are variationally optimized, but also the orbital coefficients of each molecular orbital. Two other methods, CASSCF and MRCI are also available.
  • #41: The theoretical framework of Coupled Cluster (CC) theory was developed in the late 1960s, but it was not until the late 1970s that the practical implementation began to take place and until 1982 that the corner stone of modern implementation, CCSD (CC including all single and double excitations), was presented. CC solves the size consistency problem of CI by forming a wave function where the excitation operators are exponentiated. The advantage of CC theory is that higher excitations are partially included, but their coefficients are determined by the lower order excitations. With a large enough basis set CCSD typically recovers 95% of the correlation energy for a molecule at equilibrium geometry, while CCSD(T) sees a further five- to ten-fold reduction in error. With such accuracy CC has become the method of choice for accurate small-molecule calculations, even though the method is not variational (property 6, above). A method closely related to CCSD is Brueckner Doubles (BD), which uses the Brueckner orbitals rather than the HF orbitals for a CCSD treatment. The Brueckner orbitals are defined as the set of orbitals for which the single excitation coefficients are zero. Finding these orbitals makes the theory slightly more computationally intensive (BD and BD(T) still scale as O(N6) and O(N7) respectively). However, BD theory promises a slight increase in accuracy above CCSD. A more acceptable way to make truncated CI size consistent was introduced by Pople et al. in 1987. Termed Quadratic Configuration Interaction (QCISD), it is formed by the addition of higher excitation terms, quadratic in the expansion coefficients, which force size-consistency.
  • #42: Møller-Plesset Perturbation theory treats the exact Hamiltonian as a small perturbation from the HF Hamiltonian -- the sum of the one-electron Fock operators. The solution of the perturbed equation to zero or first order (n = 1) gives the unperturbed Hartree-Fock energy and wave function. Second (MP2), third (MP3), and fourth (MP4) order Møller-Plesset calculations are standard levels used in calculating small systems and are implemented in many computational chemistry codes. Higher level MP level calculations are possible in some code, however, they are rarely used. The MPn energies are size consistent, but not variational.
  • #43: Semiempirical Methods are simplified versions of Hartree-Fock theory using empirical (=derived from experimental data) corrections in order to improve performance. These methods are usually referred to through acronyms encoding some of the underlying theoretical assumptions. The most frequently used methods (MNDO, AM1, PM3) are all based on the Neglect of Differential Diatomic Overlap (NDDO) integral approximation, while older methods use simpler integral schemes such as CNDO and INDO. All three approaches belong to the class of Zero Differential Overlap (ZDO) methods, in which all two-electron integrals involving two-center charge distributions are neglected. A number of additional approximations are made to speed up calculations (see below) and a number of prameterized corrections are made in order to correct for the approximate quantum mechanical model. How the parameterization is performed characterizes the particular semiempirical method. For MNDO, AM1, and PM3 the parameterization is performed such that the calculated energies are expressed as heats of formations instead of total energies.
  • #44: MNDO, PM3, and AM1 are representatives of the NDDO (neglect of diatomic differential overlap) family of methods. As this model is applied to AM1 and PM3, there are seven basic parameters that must be considered for each atom. These are augmented with up to three (four in the special case of carbon) Gaussian corrections to adjust the core/core repulsion function (CRF). The two parameters with the largest effect are the one-center/one-electron energies, Uss and Upp. These represent the kinetic energy and core-electron attractive energy of single electrons in s- and p-orbitals. The next pair of parameters are adjustments to the two-center/one-electron resonance integral, βμν, and are termed βs and βp. These parameters are responsible for bonding interactions between atoms. Another approximation within AM1 is the use of Slater functions to describe spatial features of the atomic orbitals. Slater functions are used because they require fewer parameters and are more easily parameterized. The exponents of the s- and p-orbitals on each atom become parameters and are abbreviated respectively, ζs and ζp. It should be noted that ζs and ζp also affect βμν, as it is proportional to the overlap integral (Sμν), which is in turn calculated from the Slater exponents. MNDO differs from AM1 and PM3 in that, for the lighter elements near the top of the Periodic Table, the following assumptions were made to save time:ζs = ζp and βs = βp. Also, the MNDO method includes no Gaussian functions.
  • #45: Continuing with the neglect of differential overlap, all two-electron integrals involving charge clouds arising from the overlap of two atomic orbitals on different centers are ignored. All overlap integrals arising from the overlap of two different atomic orbitals are neglected. The MNDO, AM1, and MNDO-d one-center two-electron integrals are derived from experimental data on isolated atoms. For each atom there are a maximum of five one-center two-electron integrals.
  • #51: Add nice image of something interesting; A view graph emphasizing that we must make approximations In DFT, everything we don’t know is grouped under the term “Exchange-correlation energy” (Feyman: the “stupid” energy). We know how to get it exactly for very simple systems– these solutions are then applied to more complex systems; we get good results which agree well with experiment. A jpg model of a protein folding or an animation of protein folding Communicate that DFT is very important; this is the most significant work in science
  • #59: Here is an example of how different the performance of DFT and HF methods will be in reproducing the accurate potential energy surface. Here the hydrogen molecule, H2, is used as the example.
  • #74: Triosephosphate isomerase (TIM) is a dimeric enzyme that catalyzes the conversion between dihydroxyacetone phosphate (DHAP) and R-glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate (GAP), which is an important step in glycolysis (the enzymatic breakdown of carbohydrates). TIM increases the reaction rate by more than 109 times, and has thus been referred to as a “perfect” enzyme. Many experimental techniques have been used to study the enzyme, supplemented by a number of theoretical calculations, but the complex catalytic mechanisms are not yet fully understood. Three possible mechanisms for the second step of TIM-catalyzed reactions, which involves a proton transfer, have been studied by the combined quantum mechanical/molecular mechanical (QM/MM) approach at a number of QM levels.
  • #77: An example of what the IRC curve will look like for a typical QM and QM/MM calculation, compared to the experimental value of the reaction barrier.
  • #78: Algorithms for calculating properties of a large complex system of N particles are "linear scaling" if the  computational effort needed to solve the desired equations is proportional to the total size of the system, i.e., "Order N".  This is true in classical mechanics: if all forces are short range, then the basic equations can be solved in time proportional to the number of particles.  For example, this could be one time step of a molecular dynamics simulation.  (Long range Coulomb forces can also be handled.) However, quantum mechanics is intrinsically not linear scaling. The solutions of the wave equation in general depend upon the boundary conditions.  Each eigenstates of an extended periodic system is delocalized and its values everywhere depends upon the boundary conditions.   Sharp band edges, critical pints in the band structure, a sharp Fermi surface in k space, Kohn anomalies, ...  all require extended quantum mechanical waves.   Thus in general the wave nature of quantum mechanics leads to non-locality.  In many-body systems exact solutions grow exponentially with the number of particles N, and practical approximate forms often scale as high powers of N.  For non-interacting fermion systems the Pauli exclusion principle requires there to be  N eigenstates, each extended, i.e., of size proportional to N, and each required to be orthogonal to each of the N other eigenstates, leading to effort scaling as  N3.  This is the scaling of the current efficient plane wave calculations we have described before. (The scaling can be reduced to N2 by using localized bases and other tricks.).
  • #79: A few other topics are not covered here and will be addressed elsewhere. They include implicit and explicit solvent models, relativity effect, transition state theory, temperature and pressure, periodic boundary condition and dynamics.
  • #80: This slide summarizes the advantage and disadvantage of quantum mechanic (ab initio and DFT) methods.
  • #81: Thuis slide gives you a rough idea what free and commercial software are available nowadays for the quantum mechanical calculations.
  • #82: Pass around copies of the texts We can get the book store to order some if there is enough demand Most will need to buy Exploring Chemistry – we need to order that directly from Gaussian
  • #83: In order for create a section divider slide, add a new slide, select the “Title Only” Slide Layout and apply the “Section Divider” master from the Slide Design menu. For more information regarding slide layouts and slide designs, please visit http://office.microsoft.com/training