Electronic excitation energies of molecules in solution within continuum solvation models: investigating the discrepancy between state-specific and linear-response methods

In a recent article [R. Cammi, S. Corni, B. Mennucci, and J. Tomasi, J. Chem. Phys. 122, 104513 (2005)], we demonstrated that the state-specific (SS) and the linear-response (LR) approaches, two different ways to calculate solute excitation energies in the framework of quantum-mechanical continuum m...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of chemical physics 2005-10, Vol.123 (13), p.134512-134512
Hauptverfasser: Corni, S, Cammi, R, Mennucci, B, Tomasi, J
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:In a recent article [R. Cammi, S. Corni, B. Mennucci, and J. Tomasi, J. Chem. Phys. 122, 104513 (2005)], we demonstrated that the state-specific (SS) and the linear-response (LR) approaches, two different ways to calculate solute excitation energies in the framework of quantum-mechanical continuum models of solvation, give different excitation energy expressions. In particular, they differ in the terms related to the electronic response of the solvent. In the present work, we further investigate this difference by comparing the excitation energy expressions of SS and LR with those obtained through a simple model for solute-solvent systems that bypasses one of the basic assumptions of continuum solvation models, i.e., the use of a single Hartree product of a solute and a solvent wave function to describe the total solute-solvent wave function. In particular, we consider the total solute-solvent wave function as a linear combination of the four products of two solute states and two solvent electronic states. To maximize the comparability with quantum-mechanical continuum model the resulting excitation energy expression is recast in terms of response functions of the solvent and quantities proper for the solvated molecule. The comparison of the presented expressions with the LR and SS ones enlightens the physical meaning of the terms included or neglected by these approaches and shows that SS agrees with the results of the four-level model, while LR includes a term classified as dispersion in previous treatments and neglects another related to electrostatic. A discussion on the possible origin of the LR flaw is finally given.
ISSN:0021-9606
1089-7690
DOI:10.1063/1.2039077