<?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=1737&amp;type=rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<title><![CDATA[Multiwfn forum / Double states]]></title>
		<link>http://sobereva.com/wfnbbs/viewtopic.php?id=1737</link>
		<description><![CDATA[The most recent posts in Double states.]]></description>
		<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Oct 2025 18:39:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>FluxBB</generator>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Double states]]></title>
			<link>http://sobereva.com/wfnbbs/viewtopic.php?pid=5396#p5396</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Thank you very much !!</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (solan)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Sun, 12 Oct 2025 18:39:35 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://sobereva.com/wfnbbs/viewtopic.php?pid=5396#p5396</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Double states]]></title>
			<link>http://sobereva.com/wfnbbs/viewtopic.php?pid=5358#p5358</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>It you focus on local excitation, B3LYP or PBE0 is a reasonable choice. If there are charge-transfer excitations, wB97XD or CAM-B3LYP would be better for them (but they often overestimate excitation energy of local excitations)</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (sobereva)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2025 09:31:12 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://sobereva.com/wfnbbs/viewtopic.php?pid=5358#p5358</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Double states]]></title>
			<link>http://sobereva.com/wfnbbs/viewtopic.php?pid=5356#p5356</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Thank you very much for your quick and insightful response; it has made the concept much clearer to me, and I will investigate it in more depth. Likewise, which functional would be suitable for studying this type of radical? I have seen that many people use B3LYP directly, but that seems to be a convenient choice rather than the result of a methodical study. Would ωB97X-D be appropriate?</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (solan)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2025 07:26:27 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://sobereva.com/wfnbbs/viewtopic.php?pid=5356#p5356</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Double states]]></title>
			<link>http://sobereva.com/wfnbbs/viewtopic.php?pid=5354#p5354</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>You need to check &lt;S**2&gt;, if an excited state can be regarded as a doublet state, its &lt;S**2&gt; should be close to 0.75 (for example, 0.82 is acceptable, but 1.01 cannot be regarded as doublet, indicating it has significantly spin contamination)</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (sobereva)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2025 00:25:46 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://sobereva.com/wfnbbs/viewtopic.php?pid=5354#p5354</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Double states]]></title>
			<link>http://sobereva.com/wfnbbs/viewtopic.php?pid=5353#p5353</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>First of all, I would like to express my appreciation for your versatile and useful program. I am currently performing calculations on Trityl (triphenylmethyl) radicals, which are doublet ground-state systems. When computing their excited states using TD-DFT in Gaussian, how can I identify the corresponding D₁ and D₂ energies? Are they simply the first two states listed in the output?</p><p>I notice that both states have very similar energies, with a difference of only about 0.01 nm, which seems somewhat counterintuitive to me.</p><p>Thank you very much in advance for your assistance.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (solan)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2025 10:11:31 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://sobereva.com/wfnbbs/viewtopic.php?pid=5353#p5353</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
