Paper detail

Understanding density driven errors for reaction barrier heights

Delocalization errors, such as charge-transfer and some self-interaction errors, plague computationally-efficient and otherwise-accurate density functional approximations (DFAs). Evaluating a semi-local DFA non-self-consistently on the Hartree-Fock (HF) density is often recommended as a computationally cheap remedy for delocalization errors. For sophisticated meta-GGAs like SCAN, this approach can achieve remarkable accuracy. When this HF-DFT (or DFA@HF) significantly improves over the DFA, it is often presumed that the HF density is more accurate than the self-consistent DFA density. By applying the metrics of density-corrected density functional theory (DFT), we show that HF-DFT works for barrier heights by making a localizing charge transfer error or density over-correction, thereby producing a somewhat-reliable cancellation of density- and functional-driven errors for the energy. A quantitative analysis of the charge transfer errors in a few transition states confirms this trend. We do not have the exact functional and exact densities that are needed to evaluate the exact density- and functional-driven errors for the large BH76 database of barrier heights. Instead, we have identified and used three non-local proxy functionals (the SCAN 50% global hybrid, the range-separated hybrid LC-$ω$PBE, and SCAN-FLOSIC) and their self-consistent densities. These functionals yield reasonably accurate self-consistent barrier heights, and their self-consistent total energies are nearly piecewise linear in fractional electron number - two important points of similarity to the exact functional. We argue that density-driven errors of the energy in a self-consistent density functional calculation are second-order in the density error, and that large density-driven errors arise primarily from incorrect electron transfers over length scales larger than the diameter of an atom.

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.