Published in

American Chemical Society, Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation, 10(12), p. 5076-5087, 2016

DOI: 10.1021/acs.jctc.6b00774

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Benchmark of GW Approaches for the GW100 Test Set

Journal article published in 2016 by Fabio Caruso ORCID, Matthias Dauth, Michiel J. van Setten, Patrick Rinke
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
  • Must obtain written permission from Editor
  • Must not violate ACS ethical Guidelines
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
  • Must obtain written permission from Editor
  • Must not violate ACS ethical Guidelines
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

For the recent GW100 test set of molecular ionization energies, we present a comprehensive assessment of different GW methodologies: fully self-consistent GW (scGW), quasiparticle self-consistent GW (qsGW), partially self-consistent GW0 (scGW0), perturbative GW (G0W0), and optimized G0W0 based on the minimization of the deviation from the straight-line error (DSLE-min GW). We compare our GW calculations to coupled-cluster singles, doubles, and perturbative triples [CCSD(T)] reference data for GW100. We find scGW and qsGW ionization energies in excellent agreement with CCSD(T), with discrepancies typically smaller than 0.3 eV (scGW) and 0.2 eV (qsGW), respectively. For scGW0 and G0W0 the deviation from CCSD(T) is strongly dependent on the starting point. We further relate the discrepancy between the GW ionization energies and CCSD(T) to the deviation from straight line error (DSLE). In DSLE-minimized GW calculations, the DSLE is significantly reduced, yielding a systematic improvement in the description of the ionization energies.