1 / 26

Progress in Calculating the Potential Energy Surface of H 3 +

Progress in Calculating the Potential Energy Surface of H 3 + . Ludwik Adamowicz and Michele Pavanello , Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry. February 9th, 2012. UA SUPERCOMPUTERS Shared Memory - SGI Altix 4700

jera
Télécharger la présentation

Progress in Calculating the Potential Energy Surface of H 3 +

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Progress in Calculating the Potential Energy Surface of H3+ LudwikAdamowicz and Michele Pavanello, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry February 9th, 2012

  2. UA SUPERCOMPUTERS • Shared Memory - SGI Altix 4700 • Marin - Interactive Front End, Altix 4700, 100-core Itanium2, 160 GB memory • Bora - Batch System, Altix 4700, • 512-core Itanium2, 1024 GB memory • Cluster - SGI Altix ICE 8200 • Ice - Interactive Front End, 3 "round-robin" login nodes cluster • 1392-core, quad-core Xeon (Harpertown), 2 GB memory/core • New Cluster - SGI Altix ICE 8400 • 2112-core, 6-core INTEL Xeon • Soon To Be Installed • SGI Altix UV • IBM: DataPlex HTC

  3. Why Molecules with Hydrogen? • Goal: Accurate PES of H3+ • Motivation • Interstellar chemistry: (Hn)+ • Spectroscopy: H3+ • What has been done in the past? *CencekJCP, 108, 2831 (1998) ; Explicitly Correlated Gaussians (ECGs)

  4. What are ECGs? • Expansion in terms of basis functions • The basis set is made of explicitly correlated Gaussians with floating centers Atoms Molecules The case of H3+ linear and non-linear parameters

  5. The cusp condition The derivative of Ψ in this point counts! Electron-Nucleous cusp Electron-Electron cusp Kato’s condition* Cusp function: Is the nucleous really a point charge? *T. Kato (1957)

  6. Optimization of ФM The step size is determined as a function of G and E.

  7. Does our approach work?Single point calculation • Variational Principle Non-linearity: M*7 parameters Encounter linear dependencies 1) Pavanello et. al. J. Chem. Phys., 130, 034104 (2009) 2) Cencek et al. Chem. Phys. Lett. 246, 417-420 (1995)

  8. Limits • 5 or 6 electrons maximum • Antisymmetrize electrons: ne! • Basis set size: M2 • Schrödinger Equation • Born-Oppenheimer approximation • Relativity • Coulomb Hamiltonian • Implementation – Parallelization – Numerical Instability • Encounter linear dependencies • Memory constraints

  9. What if we move the geometry?Can we carry out PES calculations? • Re-optimize from scratch the basis set for each PES grid point. • Takes a long time to optimize the basis set • Hundreds, sometimes thousands of geometries need to be considered • Guess the basis set from nearby geometries • How? • Is it precise? • Is the precision maintained for each grid point? We need a benchmark!

  10. Test of the spring method Benchmark PES of H3+ Generated a 377-point PES The wavefunction at a certain geometry was generated from one of a nearby geometry The spring model M=900 6300 parameters Convergence dictated by the value of the analytical gradient ( GTG < 10-11a.u. ) and not of the energy Pavanello et al. J. Chem. Phys. 130, 001033 (2009)

  11. 1st benchmark: D3h symmetry • We notice: • Our energies are always 0.01 cm-1 below the best in the literature. • Stretched geometries seem to show better improvement The more negative the better! ΔE(a.u. x 10-8) Total Energy (a.u.)

  12. 2nd benchmark: C2v & asymmetric asymmetric C2v 4 C2v 3

  13. The challenge: a complete PES of H3+toward sub 0.01 cm-1 accuracy R13 R23 ρ (a.u.) R12 Total Energy (a.u.) Viegas, Alijah and Varandas, JCP (2007) Johnson, JCP (1980) Whitten and Smith (1968) Alijah at al. used MR-CI with cc-pV5Z

  14. MR-CI vs "exact" H3+ [H H H]+ 2H+H+ Alijah’s most diffuse function Alijah et al. Our work (ECGs) Energy Difference (a.u.) 20 cm-1

  15. Vibrational Wave function Plots

  16. Conclusions on H3+ • We developed: • ECG with analytical gradients, tested on single point calculations • Spring method to calculate PESs, tested on a 69 point PES portion of H3+ • The code is applicable to any (ne<7) molecular system • We achieved: • Most accurate variational energies to date • Most accurate (≈ 0.01cm-1) and extensive PES (42000 grid points) of H3+

  17. Conclusions on H3+ • To be developed: • Leading relativistic corrections • Non-adiabatic corrections • Leading QED corrections

  18. Equivalent treatment of nuclei and electrons in H3+ The total laboratory-frame nonrelativistic Hamiltonian:

  19. Separating out the center of mass motion

  20. The internal Hamiltonian Molecular atom.

  21. Explicitly Correlated Gaussian Functions for non-BO calculations of H3+ diatomics H3+ or

  22. Expectation values of the ground state non-BO energies, virial coefficients (η) , and internuclear distances for some isotopologues of H3+ . All values are calculated for an optimized 50 term explicitly correlated Gaussian basis set and are in atomic units.

  23. Acknowledgements Coworkers: Pawel Kozlowski Donald Kinghorn Mauricio CafieroSergiyBubin Michele Pavanello Wei-Cheng Tung Collaborators: Alexander Alijah Nikolai Zobov Irina I. Mizus Oleg Polyansky Jonathan Tennyson TamásSzidarovzsky Attila Császár Max Berg AnnemiekePetrignani Andreas Wolf Support: NSF

More Related