mirror of
https://github.com/nwchemgit/nwchem.git
synced 2026-07-27 21:55:30 -04:00
automatically be expanded to include useful information about the checkin (including the file's revision number). With the switch over to SVN this was lost because SVN only does this expansion if you explicitly ask for it (for every single file). I have added a script to the contrib directory that sets the appropriate property to get SVN to do this expansion. This script will make it easy to do this every time new source files are added. It is called svn_expand_Id, the script contains some comments that explain the issue and how it addresses this. This checkin sets this property for a subset of the relevant files (trying to commit all files at once failed with svn crashing). In future the script will only affect those files for which the property was not set before.
173 lines
7 KiB
TeX
173 lines
7 KiB
TeX
%
|
|
% $Id$
|
|
%
|
|
\label{sec:etrans}
|
|
|
|
The NWChem electron transfer (ET) module calculates the electronic coupling energy (also called the electron transfer
|
|
matrix element) between ET reactant and product states. The electronic coupling ($V_{RP}$), activation energy ($\Delta G^{*}$),
|
|
and nuclear reorganization energy ($\lambda$) are all components of the electron transfer rate defined by Marcus' theory, which
|
|
also depends on the temperature (reference 1):
|
|
|
|
\begin{equation}
|
|
{k_{ET}}=
|
|
\frac{2\pi}{\hbar}
|
|
V_{RP}^{2}
|
|
\frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi \lambda k_{B}T}}
|
|
\exp \left( \frac{- \Delta G^{*}}{k_{B} T} \right)
|
|
\end{equation}
|
|
|
|
The ET module utilizes the method of {\em Corresponding Orbital Transformation} to calculate $V_{RP}$.
|
|
The only input required are the names
|
|
of the files containing the open-shell (UHF) MO vectors for the ET reactant and product states ($R$ and $P$).
|
|
|
|
The basis set used in the calculation of $V_{RP}$ must be the same as the basis set used to calculate the MO vectors of
|
|
$R$ and $P$. The magnitude of $V_{RP}$ depends on the amount of overlap between $R$ and $P$,
|
|
which is important to consider when choosing the basis set. Diffuse functions may be
|
|
necessary to fill in the overlap, particularly when the ET distance is long.
|
|
|
|
The MO's of $R$ and $P$ must correspond to localized states. for instance, in the reaction $A^{ -}$ $B$ $\rightarrow$ $A$ $B^{ -}$
|
|
the transferring electron is localized on A in the reactant state and is localized on B in the product state.
|
|
To verify the localization of the electron in the calculation of the vectors, carefully examine the Mulliken population
|
|
analysis. In order to determine which orbitals are involved in the electron transfer, use the print keyword \verb+"mulliken ao"+
|
|
which prints the Mulliken population of each basis function.
|
|
|
|
An effective core potential (ECP) basis can be used to replace core electrons. However, there is one caveat: the orbitals
|
|
involved in electron transfer must not be replaced with ECP's. Since the ET orbitals are valence orbitals, this is not usually
|
|
a problem, but the user should use ECP's with care.
|
|
|
|
Suggested references are listed below. The first two references gives a good description
|
|
of Marcus' two-state ET model, and the appendix of the third reference details the method used
|
|
in the ET module.
|
|
|
|
\begin{enumerate}
|
|
\item R.A. Marcus, N. Sutin, Biochimica Biophysica Acta 35, 437, (1985).
|
|
\item J.R. Bolton, N. Mataga, and G. McLendon in ``Electron Transfer in Inorganic, Organic and Biological Systems"
|
|
(American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C., 1991)
|
|
\item A. Farazdel, M. Dupuis, E. Clementi, and A. Aviram,
|
|
J.~Am.~Chem.~Soc., 112, 4206 (1990).
|
|
\end{enumerate}
|
|
|
|
\section{{\tt VECTORS} --- input of MO vectors for ET reactant and product states}
|
|
\label{sec:etransvectors}
|
|
|
|
\begin{verbatim}
|
|
VECTORS [reactants] <string reactants_filename>
|
|
VECTORS [products ] <string products_filename>
|
|
\end{verbatim}
|
|
|
|
In the \verb+VECTORS+ directive the user specifies the source
|
|
of the molecular orbital vectors for the ET reactant and product states.
|
|
This is required input, as no default filename will be set by the program.
|
|
In fact, this is the only required input in the ET module, although there are
|
|
other optional keywords described below.
|
|
|
|
\section{{\tt FOCK/NOFOCK} --- method for calculating the two-electron contribution to $V_{RP}$ }
|
|
\label{sec:etransfock}
|
|
|
|
\begin{verbatim}
|
|
<string (FOCK||NOFOCK) default FOCK>
|
|
\end{verbatim}
|
|
|
|
This directive enables/disables the use of the NWChem's Fock matrix
|
|
routine in the calculation of the two-electron portion of the ET Hamiltonian.
|
|
Since the Fock matrix routine has been optimized for speed, accuracy and parallel performance,
|
|
it is the most efficient choice.
|
|
|
|
Alternatively, the user can calculate the two-electron contribution to the ET Hamiltonian
|
|
with another subroutine which may be more accurate for systems with a small
|
|
number of basis functions, although it is slower.
|
|
|
|
\section{{\tt TOL2E} --- integral screening threshold}
|
|
\label{sec:etranstol2e}
|
|
|
|
\begin{verbatim}
|
|
TOL2E <real tol2e default max(10e-12,min(10e-7, S(RP)*10e-7 )>
|
|
\end{verbatim}
|
|
|
|
The variable \verb+tol2e+ is used in determining the integral
|
|
screening threshold for the evaluation of the two-electron contribution to the Hamiltonian
|
|
between the electron transfer reactant and product states.
|
|
As a default, \verb+tol2e+ is set depending on the magnitude
|
|
of the overlap between the ET reactant and product states ($S_{RP}$), and is not less than 1.0d-12
|
|
or greater than 1.0d-7.
|
|
|
|
The input to specify the threshold explicitly within the \verb+ET+
|
|
directive is, for example:
|
|
|
|
\begin{verbatim}
|
|
tol2e 1e-9
|
|
\end{verbatim}
|
|
|
|
\section{{\tt Example}}
|
|
|
|
The following example is for a simple electron transfer reaction, $He_{}$ $\rightarrow$ $He^{ +}$.
|
|
The ET calculation is easy to execute, but it is crucial that ET reactant and product
|
|
wavefunctions reflect {\em localized states}. This can be accomplished
|
|
using either a fragment guess (shown in the example, see \ref{sec:fragguess}), or a charged atomic
|
|
density guess (see \ref{sec:atomscf}).
|
|
For self-exchange ET reactions such as this one, you can use the
|
|
\verb+REORDER+ keyword to move the electron from the first helium to the second (see \ref{sec:vectors}).
|
|
|
|
Example input :
|
|
\begin{verbatim}
|
|
|
|
#ET reactants:
|
|
charge 1
|
|
scf
|
|
doublet; uhf; vectors input fragment HeP.mo He.mo output HeA.mo
|
|
# HeP.mo are the vectors for He(+),
|
|
# He.mo are the vectors for neutral He.
|
|
end
|
|
task scf
|
|
|
|
#ET products:
|
|
charge 1
|
|
scf
|
|
doublet; uhf; vectors input HeA.mo reorder 2 1 output HeB.mo
|
|
end
|
|
task scf
|
|
|
|
et
|
|
vectors reactants HeA.mo
|
|
vectors products HeB.mo
|
|
end
|
|
task scf et
|
|
|
|
\end{verbatim}
|
|
|
|
Here is what the output looks like for this example:
|
|
\begin{verbatim}
|
|
Electron Transfer Calculation
|
|
-----------------------------
|
|
|
|
MO vectors for reactants: HeA.mo
|
|
MO vectors for products : HeB.mo
|
|
|
|
Electronic energy of reactants H(RR) -5.3402392824
|
|
Electronic energy of products H(PP) -5.3402392824
|
|
|
|
Reactants/Products overlap S(RP) -0.0006033839
|
|
|
|
Reactants/Products interaction energy:
|
|
-------------------------------------
|
|
One-electron contribution H1(RP) 0.0040314092
|
|
|
|
Beginning calculation of 2e contribution
|
|
Two-electron integral screening (tol2e) : 6.03E-11
|
|
|
|
Two-electron contribution H2(RP) -0.0007837138
|
|
Total interaction energy H(RP) 0.0032476955
|
|
|
|
Electron Transfer Coupling Energy |V(RP)| 0.0000254810
|
|
5.592 cm-1
|
|
0.000693 eV
|
|
0.016 kcal/mol
|
|
|
|
\end{verbatim}
|
|
|
|
The overlap between the ET reactant and product states ($S_{RP}$) is small,
|
|
so the magnitude of the coupling between the states is also small.
|
|
If the fragment guess
|
|
or charged atomic density guess were not used, the Mulliken spin population would be 0.5 on both He atoms, the overlap between
|
|
the ET reactant and product states would be \verb+100 %+ and an infinite
|
|
$V_{RP}$ would result.
|