Page 79 - Strategies and Applications in Quantum Chemistry From Molecular Astrophysics to Molecular Engineer
P. 79

64                                                           C. VALDEMORO

                            A detailed discussion of these and other variants  was  given in  (Ref.35).  Attention
                            must be called to the fact that these methods are not variational which causes the
                            energies obtained  with  them to be lower than  those obtained  with the FCI method.
                            The counterpart to this deffect is that excited states, open-shell systems, and radicals,
                            can be  calculated  with as  much ease  as  the ground  state  and  closed-shell systems.
                            Also, the size of the calculation is determined solely by the size of the Hilbert subspace
                            chosen and does not depend in principle on the number of electrons since all happens
                            as if only two electrons were considered.
                            While from the energy point of view, the correlation effects seem to be overestimated,
                            the RDM’s are particularly satisfactory. Thus, when comparing the 2-RDM’s ob-
                            tained  with these approximations for the ground state of the Beryllium atom with
                            the corresponding FCI one,  the standard  deviations are: 0.00208236  and 0.00208338
                            for the MPS and IP respectively.  For this  state,  which has a dominant  four electron
                            configuration of the type,    the more important errors, which nevertheless can
                            be considered small, are given in table 2.
                            In table 2, the elements which are equal due to symmetry have been omitted.

















                            It can be seen that, even for this case where no ambiguity exists in applying the IP
                            approximation, the  results are  slightly better  with the MPS variant  which  seems to
                            favor this latter approximation.
                            The data  given in  table 2  have  been  obtained  using a  double zeta  basis  [36] and
                            transforming it  to  the  basis which  diagonalizes the 1-SRH matrix  which  as we  saw
                            in subsection 5.3 is a basis  both  good and simple to determine.
                            Analysis of the  different terms of the  energy
                            Another interesting  analysis of this  method can  be  carried out  by  applying a  par-
                            titioning of  the  energy [37]  which  shows up the role  played  by the 1–RDM, the
                            1-HRDM and  the  2-HRDM.
                            Thus, it  has  been shown  that the energy can  be partitioned as



                            where:
   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84