Jump to main content
US EPA
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Search
Search
Main menu
Environmental Topics
Laws & Regulations
About EPA
Health & Environmental Research Online (HERO)
Contact Us
Print
Feedback
Export to File
Search:
This record has one attached file:
Add More Files
Attach File(s):
Display Name for File*:
Save
Citation
Tags
HERO ID
2019533
Reference Type
Journal Article
Title
CCSD[T] Describes Noncovalent Interactions Better than the CCSD(T), CCSD(TQ), and CCSDT Methods
Author(s)
Rezac, Jan; Simova, L; Hobza, P
Year
2013
Is Peer Reviewed?
Yes
Journal
Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
ISSN:
1549-9618
EISSN:
1549-9626
Volume
9
Issue
1
Page Numbers
364-369
Language
English
PMID
26589039
DOI
10.1021/ct3008777
Web of Science Id
WOS:000313378700040
Abstract
The CCSD(T) method is often called the "gold standard" of computational chemistry, because it is one of the most accurate methods applicable to reasonably large molecules. It is particularly useful for the description of noncovalent interactions where the inclusion of triple excitations is necessary for achieving a satisfactory accuracy. While it is widely used as a benchmark, the accuracy of CCSD(T) interaction energies has not been reliably quantified yet against more accurate calculations. In this work, we compare the CCSD[T], CCSD(T), and CCSD(TQ) noniterative methods with full CCSDTQ and CCSDT(Q) calculations. We investigate various types of noncovalent complexes [hydrogen-bonded (water dimer, ammonia dimer, water ··· ammonia), dispersion-bound (methane dimer, methane ··· ammonia), and π-π stacked (ethene dimer)] using various coupled-clusters schemes up to CCSDTQ in 6-31G*(0.25), 6-31G**(0.25, 0.15), and aug-cc-pVDZ basis sets. We show that CCSDT(Q) reproduces the CCSDTQ results almost exactly and can thus serve as a benchmark in the cases where CCSDTQ calculations are not feasible. Surprisingly, the CCSD[T] method provides better agreement with the benchmark values than the other noniterative analogs, CCSD(T) and CCSD(TQ), and even than the much more expensive iterative CCSDT scheme. The CCSD[T] interaction energies differ from the benchmark data by less than 5 cal/mol on average (for all complexes and all basis sets), whereas the error of CCSD(T) is 9 cal/mol. In larger systems, the difference between these two methods can grow by as much as 0.15 kcal/mol. While this effect can be explained only as an error compensation, the CCSD[T] method certainly deserves more attention in accurate calculations of noncovalent interactions.
Home
Learn about HERO
Using HERO
Search HERO
Projects in HERO
Risk Assessment
Transparency & Integrity