Paper detail

Benchmarking GW against exact diagonalization for semi-empirical models

We calculate groundstate total energies and single-particle excitation energies of seven pi conjugated molecules described with the semi-empirical Pariser-Parr-Pople (PPP) model using self-consistent many-body perturbation theory at the GW level and exact diagonalization. For the total energies GW captures around 65% of the groundstate correlation energy. The lowest lying excitations are overscreened by GW leading to an underestimation of electron affinities and ionization potentials by approximately 0.15 eV corresponding to 2.5%. One-shot G_0W_0 calculations starting from Hartree-Fock reduce the screening and improve the low-lying excitation energies. The effect of the GW self-energy on the molecular excitation energies is shown to be similar to the inclusion of final state relaxations in Hartree-Fock theory. We discuss the break down of the GW approximation in systems with short range interactions (Hubbard models) where correlation effects dominate over screening/relaxation effects. Finally we illustrate the important role of the derivative discontinuity of the true exchange-correlation functional by computing the exact Kohn-Sham levels of benzene.

preprint2009arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.