Paper detail

On the basis set selection for molecular core-level $GW$ calculations

The $GW$ approximation has been recently gaining popularity among the method for simulating molecular core-level X-ray photoemission spectra. Traditionally, $GW$ core-level binding energies have been computed using either the cc-pV$n$Z or def2-$n$ZVP basis set families, extrapolating the obtained results to the complete basis set limit, followed by a an element-specific relativistic correction. Despite of achieving good accuracy, these binding energies are chronically underestimated. By using first-row elements and standard techniques known to offer good cost-accuracy ratio in other theories, we show that the cc-pV$n$Z and def2-$n$ZVP families show large contraction errors and lead to unreliable complete basis set extrapolations. On the other hand, we demonstrate that uncontracted versions of these basis sets offer vastly improved convergence. Even faster convergence can be obtained using core-rich, property-optimized, basis sets families like pcSseg-$n$, pcJ-$n$ and ccX-$n$Z. Finally, we also show that the improvement over the core properties does not degrade the calculation of the valence excitations, and thus offer a balanced description of both core and valence regions.

preprint2022arXivOpen 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.