Multiwfn official website: http://sobereva.com/multiwfn. Multiwfn forum in Chinese: http://bbs.keinsci.com/wfn
You are not logged in.
Dear Forum, I trying to make an Energy Decomposition Analysis (EDA) at the M06-2X/Def2TZVP level and I have the following question regarding dispersion component (E_disp)
we have:
(1) E_int = E_elect + E_Pauli + E_orb + E_disp
and because m06-2x contains dispersion corrections
(2) E_steric = E_elect + E_Pauli + E_disp
so
(3) E_int = E_steric + E_orb
Is Eq. (2) correct? Can I add the dispersion term in the steric component when using a functional that has dispersion corrections?
Thanks in advance for the help
R.
Offline
Please note that M06-2X doesn't have a dispersion correction term (like B3LYP-D3), however, it is still able to reasonably represent dispersion effect because of its XC functional form and training set. In other words, dispersion effect is included in its XC energy. If you hope to isolate the dispersion contribution to interfragment interaction, M06-2X should not be used.
Offline
Dear Tian Lu, thank you for your prompt reply and thank you very much for clarifying the M06-2X functional. I am not looking to separate the dispersion term, on the contrary, if a functional is able to describe by itself (i.e. without using Grimme's corrections) the dispersion effects, is it possible to assume that the term E_disp is inside E_steric, as in equation 2 of my first post?, i.e. it would be correct to assume that equation? (for functionals that can describe reasonably well the dispersion effects).
Best regards
R.
Offline
For M06-2X, since its exchange-correlation energy already sufficiently accounts for dispersion effect, (1) should be E_int = E_elect + E_Pauli + E_orb + E_xc, where E_xc denotes change of exchange-correlation energy during binding. (2) should be E_steric = E_elect + E_Pauli + E_xc. Your (3) is correct in this context.
Offline
thanks for your help!
Offline
Dear Tian Lu, its properly use the first iteration of the CCSD(T) calculation in order to perform at simple-EDA at the CCSD(T) level?
thanks for your help!
r.
Offline
Dear Tian Lu, its properly use the first iteration of the CCSD(T) calculation in order to perform at simple-EDA at the CCSD(T) level?
thanks for your help!
r.
This is in principle inappropriate.
Offline
Thank you for your replay, maybe is more convenient the use of the approximation of the Fock matrix implemented in multiwfn?
r.
Last edited by rikaaardoss (2022-07-02 02:53:26)
Offline