Random Versus Systematic Errors in Reaction Enthalpies Computed Using Semi-empirical and Minimal Basis Set Methods

23 March 2018, Version 3
This content is a preprint and has not undergone peer review at the time of posting.

Abstract

The connectivity-based hierarchy (CBH) protocol for computing accurate reaction enthalpies developed by Sengupta and Raghavachari is tested for fast ab initio methods (PBEh-3c, HF-3c, and HF/STO- 3G), tight-binding DFT methods (GFN-xTB, DFTB, and DFTB-D3), and NDDO-based semiempirical methods (AM1, PM3, PM6, PM6-DH+, PM6-D2, PM6-D3H+, PM6-D3H4X, PM7, and OM2) using the same set of 25 reactions as in the original study. For the CBH-2 scheme, which reflects the change in the immediate chemical environment of all the heavy atoms, the respective MUE relative to G4 for PBEh-3c, HF-3c, HF/STO-3G, GFN-xTB, DFTB-D3, DFTB, PM3, AM1, PM6, PM6-DH+, PM6-D3, PM6-D3H+, PM6-D3H4X, PM7, and OM2 are 1.9, 2.4, 3.0, 3.9, 3.7, 4.5, 4.8, 5.5, 5.4, 5.3, 5,4, 6.5, 5.3, 5.2, and 5.9 kcal/mol, with a single outlier removed for HF-3c, PM6, PM6-DH+, PM6-D3, PM6-D3H4X, and PM7. The increase in accuracy for the NDDO-based methods is relatively modest due to the random errors in predicted heats for formation.

Keywords

Semi-empirical methods
quantum chemistry computation
Chemistry

Supplementary materials

Title
Description
Actions
Title
fragmentSI
Description
Actions

Supplementary weblinks

Comments

Comments are not moderated before they are posted, but they can be removed by the site moderators if they are found to be in contravention of our Commenting Policy [opens in a new tab] - please read this policy before you post. Comments should be used for scholarly discussion of the content in question. You can find more information about how to use the commenting feature here [opens in a new tab] .
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy [opens in a new tab] and Terms of Service [opens in a new tab] apply.