State-Specific Coupled-Cluster Methods for Excited States

We reexamine \(\Delta\)CCSD, a state-specific coupled-cluster (CC) with single and double excitations (CCSD) approach that targets excited states through the utilization of non-Aufbau determinants. This methodology is particularly efficient when dealing with doubly excited states, a domain where the...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:arXiv.org 2024-03
Hauptverfasser: Damour, Yann, Scemama, Anthony, Jacquemin, Denis, Kossoski, Fábris, Loos, Pierre-François
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:We reexamine \(\Delta\)CCSD, a state-specific coupled-cluster (CC) with single and double excitations (CCSD) approach that targets excited states through the utilization of non-Aufbau determinants. This methodology is particularly efficient when dealing with doubly excited states, a domain where the standard equation-of-motion CCSD (EOM-CCSD) formalism falls short. Our goal here is to evaluate the effectiveness of \(\Delta\)CCSD when applied to other types of excited states, comparing its consistency and accuracy with EOM-CCSD. To this end, we report a benchmark on excitation energies computed with the \(\Delta\)CCSD and EOM-CCSD methods, for a set of molecular excited-state energies that encompasses not only doubly excited states but also doublet-doublet transitions and (singlet and triplet) singly-excited states of closed-shell systems. In the latter case, we rely on a minimalist version of multireference CC known as the two-determinant CCSD method to compute the excited states. Our dataset, consisting of 276 excited states stemming from the \textsc{quest} database [Véril \textit{et al.}, \textit{WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci.} \textbf{2021}, 11, e1517], provides a significant base to draw general conclusions concerning the accuracy of \(\Delta\)CCSD. Except for the doubly-excited states, we found that \(\Delta\)CCSD underperforms EOM-CCSD. For doublet-doublet transitions, the difference between the mean absolute errors (MAEs) of the two methodologies (of \SI{0.10}{\eV} and \SI{0.07}{\eV}) is less pronounced than that obtained for singly-excited states of closed-shell systems (MAEs of \SI{0.15}{\eV} and \SI{0.08}{\eV}). This discrepancy is largely attributed to a greater number of excited states in the latter set exhibiting multiconfigurational characters, which are more challenging for \(\Delta\)CCSD.
ISSN:2331-8422
DOI:10.48550/arxiv.2401.05048