<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<atom:link href="http://sobereva.com/wfnbbs/extern.php?action=feed&amp;tid=1490&amp;type=rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<title><![CDATA[Multiwfn forum / Are fragments need to be explicitly defined for DFT-SAPT?]]></title>
		<link>http://sobereva.com/wfnbbs/viewtopic.php?id=1490</link>
		<description><![CDATA[The most recent posts in Are fragments need to be explicitly defined for DFT-SAPT?.]]></description>
		<lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Aug 2024 14:37:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>FluxBB</generator>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Are fragments need to be explicitly defined for DFT-SAPT?]]></title>
			<link>http://sobereva.com/wfnbbs/viewtopic.php?pid=4467#p4467</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Dear Tian,<br />Thank you very very much, my nice friend.</p><p>Sincerely,<br />Saeed</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (saeed_E)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Fri, 02 Aug 2024 14:37:58 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://sobereva.com/wfnbbs/viewtopic.php?pid=4467#p4467</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Are fragments need to be explicitly defined for DFT-SAPT?]]></title>
			<link>http://sobereva.com/wfnbbs/viewtopic.php?pid=4466#p4466</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Correct.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (sobereva)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Fri, 02 Aug 2024 14:24:01 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://sobereva.com/wfnbbs/viewtopic.php?pid=4466#p4466</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Are fragments need to be explicitly defined for DFT-SAPT?]]></title>
			<link>http://sobereva.com/wfnbbs/viewtopic.php?pid=4465#p4465</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Dear Tian,</p><p>As you know much better than me, a DFT-SAPT needs &quot;grac_shift&quot; values for monomers. Please consider the below template employed for a given DFT-SAPT calculation:</p><p>memory 55 gb</p><p>molecule {<br />0 1<br /> F&#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; 0.00000000&#160; &#160; 0.00000000&#160; &#160;-1.85087700 <br /> H&#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; 0.00000000&#160; &#160; 0.00000000&#160; &#160;-0.86870700<br />--<br />-1 1<br /> Cl&#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160;0.00000000&#160; &#160; 0.00000000&#160; &#160; 1.03097600 </p><p>units angstrom<br />no_reorient<br />symmetry c1<br />}</p><p>set {<br />&#160; &#160; basis aug-cc-pVTZ<br />&#160; &#160; df_basis_scf&#160; aug-cc-pvtz-jkfit<br />&#160; &#160; df_basis_sapt aug-cc-pvtz-ri<br />&#160; &#160; scf_type DF<br />&#160; &#160; guess sad<br />&#160; &#160; freeze_core True<br />&#160; &#160; sapt_dft_functional pbe0<br />&#160; &#160; sapt_dft_grac_shift_a 0.157<br />&#160; &#160; sapt_dft_grac_shift_b 0.215<br />}</p><p>energy(&#039;sapt(dft)&#039;)</p><p>The question is as follows:</p><p>the &quot;sapt_dft_grac_shift_a&quot; is always regarded to the monomer whose structure is given first (HF in the present case) and &quot;sapt_dft_grac_shift_b&quot; is always regarded to the monomer whose structure is given second (Cl anion in the present case). Is my statement quite correct? </p><p>If no, we should properly define monomer a (for which grac_shift_a is considered) and monomer b (for which grac_shift_b is considered). If possible, considering the given template, please let me know how these two monomers should explicitly and appropriately be defined in two blocks.</p><p>Sincerely,<br />Saeed</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (saeed_E)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Thu, 01 Aug 2024 23:00:04 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://sobereva.com/wfnbbs/viewtopic.php?pid=4465#p4465</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
