Paper detail

On the Consistency of Approximate Quantum Dynamics Simulation Methods for Vibrational Spectra in the Condensed Phase

Including quantum mechanical effects on the dynamics of nuclei in the condensed phase is challenging, because the complexity of exact methods grows exponentially with the number of quantum degrees of freedom. Efforts to circumvent these limitations can be traced down to two approaches: methods that treat a small subset of the degrees of freedom with rigorous quantum mechanics, considering the rest of the system as a static or classical environment, and methods that treat the whole system quantum mechanically, but using approximate dynamics. Here we perform a systematic comparison between these two philosophies for the description of quantum effects in vibrational spectroscopy, taking the Embedded Local Monomer (LMon) model and a mixed quantum-classical (MQC) model as representatives of the first family of methods, and centroid molecular dynamics (CMD) and thermostatted ring polymer molecular dynamics (TRPMD) as examples of the latter. We use as benchmarks D$_2$O doped with HOD and pure H$_2$O at three distinct thermodynamic state points (ice Ih at 150K, and the liquid at 300K and 600K), modeled with the simple q-TIP4P/F potential energy and dipole moment surfaces. With few exceptions the different techniques yield IR absorption frequencies that are consistent with one another within a few tens of cm$^{-1}$. Comparison with classical molecular dynamics demonstrates the importance of nuclear quantum effects up to the highest temperature, and a detailed discussion of the discrepancies between the various methods let us draw some (circumstantial) conclusions about the impact of the very different approximations that underlie them. Such cross validation between radically different approaches could indicate a way forward to further improve the state of the art in simulations of condensed-phase quantum dynamics.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors2 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.