Paper detail

Revised self-consistent continuum solvation in electronic-structure calculations

The solvation model proposed by Fattebert and Gygi [Journal of Computational Chemistry 23, 662 (2002)] and Scherlis et al. [Journal of Chemical Physics 124, 074103 (2006)] is reformulated, overcoming some of the numerical limitations encountered and extending its range of applicability. We first recast the problem in terms of induced polarization charges that act as a direct mapping of the self-consistent continuum dielectric; this allows to define a functional form for the dielectric that is well behaved both in the high-density region of the nuclear charges and in the low-density region where the electronic wavefunctions decay into the solvent. Second, we outline an iterative procedure to solve the Poisson equation for the quantum fragment embedded in the solvent that does not require multi-grid algorithms, is trivially parallel, and can be applied to any Bravais crystallographic system. Last, we capture some of the non-electrostatic or cavitation terms via a combined use of the quantum volume and quantum surface [Physical Review Letters 94, 145501 (2005)] of the solute. The resulting self-consistent continuum solvation (SCCS) model provides a very effective and compact fit of computational and experimental data, whereby the static dielectric constant of the solvent and one parameter allow to fit the electrostatic energy provided by the PCM model with a mean absolute error of 0.3 kcal/mol on a set of 240 neutral solutes. Two parameters allow to fit experimental solvation energies on the same set with a mean absolute error of 1.3 kcal/mol. A detailed analysis of these results, broken down along different classes of chemical compounds, shows that several classes of organic compounds display very high accuracy, with solvation energies in error of 0.3-0.4 kcal/mol, whereby larger discrepancies are mostly limited to self-dissociating species and strong hydrogen-bond forming compounds.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.