Paper detail

Assessing the Performances of CASPT2 and NEVPT2 for Vertical Excitation Energies

Methods able to simultaneously account for both static and dynamic electron correlations have often been employed, not only to model photochemical events, but also to provide reference values for vertical transition energies, hence allowing to benchmark lower-order models. In this category, both CASPT2 and NEVPT2 are certainly popular, the latter presenting the advantage of not requiring the application of the empirical ionization-potential-electron-affinity (IPEA) and level shifts. However, the actual accuracy of these multiconfigurational approaches is not settled yet. In this context, to assess the performances of these approaches the present work relies on highly-accurate ($\pm 0.03$ eV) \emph{aug}-cc-pVTZ vertical transition energies for 284 excited states of diverse character (174 singlet, 110 triplet, 206 valence, 78 Rydberg, 78 $n \to π^*$, 119 $π\to π^*$, and 9 double excitations) determined in 35 small- to medium-sized organic molecules containing from three to six non-hydrogen atoms. The CASPT2 calculations are performed with and without IPEA shift and compared to the partially-contracted (PC) and strongly-contracted (SC) variants of NEVPT2. We find that both CASPT2 with IPEA shift and PC-NEVPT2 provide fairly reliable vertical transition energy estimates, with slight overestimations and mean absolute errors of $0.11$ and $0.13$ eV, respectively. These values are found to be rather uniform for the various subgroups of transitions. The present work completes our previous benchmarks focussed on single-reference wave function methods (\textit{J.~Chem. Theory Comput.} \textbf{14}, 4360 (2018); \emph{ibid.}, \textbf{16}, 1711 (2020)), hence allowing for a fair comparison between various families of electronic structure methods. In particular, we show that ADC(2), CCSD, and CASPT2 deliver similar accuracies for excited states with a dominant single-excitation character.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.