What's New in Gaussian 03
Cited references were chosen to be representative, accessible
overviews. However, the reference list provided should not be considered
exhaustive. For full citation lists, consult the printed or online version
of the Gaussian 03 User's Reference.
New Chemistry
Enhanced ONIOM Method
The ONIOM facility in Gaussian 03 has been significantly
enhanced over that offered by Gaussian 98 [1-2]:
-
The ONIOM facility [42] now supports electronic embedding for
ONIOM(MO:MM) calculations: the electrostatic properties of the MM region
can be taken into account during computations on the QM region.
- ONIOM(MO:MM) optimizations are much faster and can be reliably
performed for large molecules (e.g., proteins). The algorithmic
improvements include:
-
A quadratic coupled algorithm takes into account the coupling
between atoms using internal coordinates (typically, those in the
model system) and those in Cartesian coordinates (typically, the atoms
only in the MM layer), resulting in more accurate steps.
-
MO/MM optimizations perform micro-iterations for the atoms only in
the MM layer between traditional optimization steps on the real
system, resulting in faster and more reliable optimizations.
Electronic embedding can be combined with
micro-iterations.
-
Analytic frequencies are available for ONIOM(MO:MM) calculations, and
frequencies for ONIOM(MO:MO) calculations are significantly faster.
-
Gaussian 03 provides support for general molecular mechanics (MM)
force fields, including read-in and modified parameters. A standalone MM
optimization program is also included.
-
Support for an external program for any ONIOM model (e.g., an
external MM program may be used).
Solvent Effects
The Polarizable Continuum Model (PCM) solvation method has been
improved and extended [3-8]:
-
The IEFPCM model [3,9] is now the default, and analytic frequencies
are now available for this SCRF method. Additional performance
improvements include a new cavity generation technique [10].
-
Many additional properties can be modeled in solution (discussed
later in this brochure).
-
Gaussian 03 can also produce input for Klamt's COSMO-RS
program [11], which computes solvation energies, partition coefficients,
vapor pressure and other bulk properties via statistical mechanics
techniques.
Periodic Boundary Conditions (PBC)
Gaussian 03 offers PBC calculations for studying periodic
systems: e.g., polymers, surfaces and crystals [12-15]. PBC calculations
solve the Schrödinger equation subject to the boundary condition that the
molecule and the wavefunction repeat indefinitely in one, two or three
directions. Hartree-Fock and DFT energies and gradients are available for
periodic systems.
Molecular Dynamics
Dynamics calculations can provide qualitative understanding of reaction
mechanisms and quantitative details about the reaction such as product
distributions. There are two main approaches to performing these
calculations:
-
In Born-Oppenheimer Molecular Dynamics (BOMD), classical trajectories
are calculated on a local quadratic approximation to the potential
energy surface (for a review, see [16]). Our implementation [17] uses a
Hessian-based algorithm for the predictor and corrector steps, an
approach which results in a factor of 10 or more improvement in the step
size over previous implementations. While it can make use of analytic
second derivatives, BOMD is available for all theoretical methods having
analytic gradients.
-
Gaussian 03 also offers Atom-Centered Density Matrix
Propagation (ADMP) method [18-20] molecular dynamics (available for
Hartree-Fock and DFT). Drawing on the work of Car and Parrinello [21],
ADMP propagates the electronic degrees of freedom rather than solving
the SCF equations at each nuclear geometry. Unlike CP, ADMP propagates
the density matrix rather than the MOs. This is much more efficient if
an atom-centered basis set is being used. This approach overcomes some
limitations inherent in the CP implementation: e.g., there is no need to
substitute D for H in order to maintain energy conservation, and both
pure and hybrid DFT functionals can be used. ADMP calculations can also
be performed in the presence of a solvent [22], and ADMP can be used in
ONIOM(MO:MM) calculations.
Excited States
There are additions and several enhancements to excited states
methods:
-
CASSCF calculations are now more efficient due to a new algorithm for
evaluating the CI-vector in the full configuration interaction
calculation [23]. Practical active spaces increase to about 14 orbitals
for energies and gradients (they remain at about 8 orbitals for
frequencies).
-
The Restricted Active Space (RAS) SCF method [24] is also
available[25]. RASSCF calculations partition the molecular orbitals into
five sections: the lowest lying occupieds (considered inactive in the
calculation), the RAS1 space of doubly occupied MOs, the RAS2 space
containing the most important orbitals for the problem, the RAS3 space
of weakly occupied MOs and the remaining unoccupied orbitals (also
treated as frozen by the calculation). Thus, the active space in CASSCF
calculations is divided into three parts in a RAS calculations, and
allowed configurations are defined by specifying the minimum number of
electrons that must be present in the RAS1 space and the maximum number
that must be in the RAS3 space, in addition to the total number of
electrons in the three RAS spaces.
-
NBO orbitals for may be used for defining CAS and RAS active spaces.
These provide good initial guesses for the required antibonding orbitals
which correlate with the bonds/lone pairs of interest.
-
The Symmetry Adapted Cluster/Configuration Interaction (SAC-CI)
method of Nakatsuji and coworkers is now included in Gaussian.
This method has many uses: predicting very accurate excited states of
organic systems, studying two-to-many electron excitation processes such
as the shake-up in the ionization spectrum, and other problem types. For
an overview of the SAC-CI method, see [26-27].
-
Solvent Effects: Excited states can be modeled in the presence of a
solvent [28-29] using the CI-Singles and Time Dependent Hartree-Fock and
DFT methods.
Molecular Properties
Gaussian 03 provides many new molecular properties:
-
Spin-spin coupling constants [31-34], which can aid in distinguishing
conformations in magnetic spectra.
-
g tensors and other hyperfine spectra tensors [49-52]. Gaussian
03 can produce nuclear electric quadrupole constants, rotational
constants, the quartic centrifugal distortion terms, the electronic spin
rotation terms, the nuclear spin rotation terms, the dipolar hyperfine
terms and Fermi contact terms. All tensors can be exported to Pickett's
fitting and spectral analysis program [53].
-
Harmonic vibration-rotation coupling [43-44]: A spectroscopic
property dependent on the coupling between molecules' vibrational and
rotational modes. It is used to analyze detailed rotational spectra.
-
Anharmonic vibration and vibration-rotation coupling [44-48]: Using
perturbation theory, these higher order terms are incorporated into
frequency calculations in order to produce more accurate results.
-
Pre-resonance Raman spectra which yield information about ground
state structures, connectivity, and vibrational states.
-
Optical Rotations/Optical Rotary Dispersion: Used to distinguish
enantiomers of chiral systems [39-41] (this property is computed via
GIAOs).
-
Electronic Circular Dichroism (ECD): This property is the
differential absorption in the visible and ultraviolet regions for
optically active molecules, and is used to assign absolute
configurations [35-36]. Predicted spectra can also be useful in
interpreting existing ECD data and peak assignments.
-
Frequency-dependent polarizabilities and hyperpolarizabilities, which
can be used to study how the molecular properties of materials vary with
wavelength of the incident light [37-38].
-
Magnetic susceptibilities computed with Gauge-Independent Atomic
Orbitals (GIAOs) [30]. This property is the magnetic analogue to the
electric polarizability, and it provides insight into the diamagnetic
vs. paramagnetic character of molecules.
-
Solvent Effects: Electric and magnetic properties and the various
spectra can be predicted for systems in solution as well as ones in the
gas phase [54-56].
-
Properties with ONIOM: The ONIOM method may be used with these
electric and magnetic properties.
Fundamental Algorithms
-
Much Better Initial Guesses: Gaussian 03 uses the Harris
functional for generating initial guesses. This functional [59] is a
non-iterative approximation to DFT, and it produces initial guesses
which are better than those produced by Gaussian 98: for example, there
are modest improvements for organic systems but very substantial
improvements for compounds containing metals.
-
New SCF Convergence Algorithm: The default SCF algorithm now uses a
combination of two Direct Inversion in the Iterative Subspace (DIIS)
extrapolation methods EDIIS and CDIIS. EDIIS [58] uses energies for
extrapolation, and it dominates the early iterations of the SCF
convergence process. CDIIS, which performs extrapolation based on the
commutators of the Fock and density matrices, handles the latter phases
of SCF convergence. This new algorithm is very reliable, and previously
troublesome SCF convergence cases now almost always converge with the
default algorithm. For the few remaining pathological convergence cases,
Gaussian 03 offers Fermi broadening and damping in combination
with CDIIS (including automatic level shifting).
-
Density Fitting for Pure DFT Calculations: Gaussian 03
provides the density fitting approximation [60,61] for pure DFT
calculations. This approach expands the density in a set of
atom-centered functions when computing the Coulomb interaction instead
of computing all of the two-electron integrals. It provides significant
performance gains for pure DFT calculations on medium sized systems too
small to take advantage of the linear scaling algorithms without a
significant degradation in accuracy. Gaussian 03 can generate an
appropriate fitting basis automatically from the AO basis, or you may
select one of the built-in fitting sets.
-
Faster and Automated FMM: The fast multipole method (FMM) in
Gaussian 98 allowed the computational cost for large DFT
calculations to scale linearly with system size. In Gaussian 03,
improvements to these algorithms [57] means that their performance gains
can be realized for systems of more modest size as well (~100 atoms for
pure DFT calculations and ~150 atoms with hybrid functionals). In
addition, this feature is now fully automated: the program invokes FMM
automatically when appropriate.
-
Coulomb Engine: Gaussian 03 incorporates a faster algorithm
for the Coulomb operator for pure DFT calculations. The Coulomb engine
produces the exact Coulomb matrix without explicitly forming four center
two electron integrals. This substantially reduces the CPU time for the
Coulomb problem in pure DFT calculations.
-
O(N) Exact Exchange: A new algorithm for Hartree-Fock and DFT
calculations using hybrid functionals implements screening of the exact
exchange contribution via the density matrix to eliminate the many zero
value terms [62]. This technique results in a linear computational cost
for these methods without accuracy loss.
Additional Features
References
| 1 |
T. Vreven, K. Morokuma, Ö. Farkas, H. B.
Schlegel, and M. J. Frisch, J. Comp. Chem. in press
(2003). |
| 2 |
T. Vreven, I. Komáromi, S. Dapprich, K.
S. Byun, J. A. Montgomery Jr., K. Morokuma, and M. J. Frisch, in
prep. (2003). |
| 3 |
B. Mennucci, E. Cancès, and J. Tomasi,
J. Phys. Chem. B 101, 10506 (1997). |
| 4 |
B. Mennucci and J. Tomasi, J. Chem.
Phys. 106, 5151 (1997). |
| 5 |
M. Cossi, N. Rega, G. Scalmani and V.
Barone, J. Chem. Phys. 114, 5691 (2001). |
| 6 |
M. Cossi, G. Scalmani, N. Rega, and V.
Barone, J. Chem Phys. 117, 43 (2002). |
| 7 |
M. Cossi, N. Rega, G. Scalmani, V.
Barone, J. Comp. Chem. in press (2003). |
| 8 |
G. Scalmani, V. Barone, K. N. Kudin, C.
S. Pomelli, G. E. Scuseria, and M. J. Frisch, Theo. Chem. Acc.,
submitted (2003). |
| 9 |
E. Cancès and B. Mennucci, J. Chem.
Phys. 114, 4744 (2001). |
| 10 |
G. Scalmani, N. Rega, M. Cossi and V.
Barone, in prep. (2003). |
| 11 |
F. Eckert and A. Klamt, AIChE Journal
48, 369 (2002). |
| 12 |
K. N. Kudin and G. E. Scuseria, Chem.
Phys. Lett. 289, 611 (1998). |
| 13 |
K. N. Kudin and G. E. Scuseria, Chem.
Phys. Lett. 283, 61 (1998). |
| 14 |
K. N. Kudin and G. E. Scuseria, Phys.
Rev. B 61, 16440 (2000). |
| 15 |
O. V. Yazyev, K. N. Kudin, and G. E.
Scuseria, Phys. Rev. B 65, art. no. 205117 (2002). |
| 16 |
K. Bolton, W. L. Hase, and G. H.
Peshlherbe, in Modern Methods for Multidimensional Dynamics
Computation in Chemistry, Ed. D. L. Thompson (World Scientific,
Singapore, 1998) 143. |
| 17 |
J. M. Millam, V. Bakken, W. Chen, W. L.
Hase, and B. H. Schlegel, J. Chem. Phys. 111, 3800
(1999). |
| 18 |
H. B. Schlegel, J. M. Millam, S. S.
Iyengar, G. A. Voth, A. D. Daniels, G. E. Scuseria, and M. J.
Frisch, J. Chem. Phys. 114, 9758 (2001). |
| 19 |
S. S. Iyengar, H. B. Schlegel, J. M.
Millam, G. A. Voth, G. E. Scuseria, and M. J. Frisch, J. Chem. Phys.
115, 10291 (2001). |
| 20 |
H. B. Schlegel, S. S. Iyengar, X. Li, J.
M. Millam, G. A. Voth, G. E. Scuseria, and M. J. Frisch, J. Chem.
Phys. 117, 8694 (2002). |
| 21 |
R. Car and M. Parrinello, Phys. Rev.
Lett. 55, 2471 (1985). |
| 22 |
N. Rega, S. S. Iyengar, G. A. Voth, H.
B. Schlegel, G. E. Scuseria, and M. J. Frisch, in prep.
(2003). |
| 23 |
M. Klene, M. A. Robb, M. J. Frisch, and
P. Celani, J. Chem. Phys. 113, 5653 (2000). |
| 24 |
J. Olsen, B. O. Roos, P. Jorgensen, and
H. J. A. Jensen, J. Chem. Phys. 89, 2185 (1988). |
| 25 |
M. Klene, M. A. Robb, L. Blancafort, and
M. J. Frisch, in prep (2003). |
| 26 |
H. Nakatsuji, in Computational
Chemistry-Reviews of Current Trends, Ed. J. Leszcynski, Vol. 2
(World Scientific, Singapore, 1997) 62-124. |
| 27 |
M. Ehara, M. Ishida, K. Toyota, and H.
Nakatsuji, in Reviews in Modern Quantum Chemistry, Ed. K. D. Sen
(World Scientific, Singapore, 2002) 293. |
| 28 |
B. Mennucci, R. Cammi, and J. Tomasi, J.
Chem. Phys. 109, 2798 (1998). |
| 29 |
M. Cossi and V. Barone, J. Chem. Phys.
115, 4708 (2001). |
| 30 |
K. Ruud, T. Helgaker, K. L. Bak, P.
Jorgensen, and H. J. A. Jensen, J. Chem. Phys. 99, 3847
(1993). |
| 31 |
V. Sychrovsky, J. Grafenstein, and D.
Cremer, J. Chem. Phys. 113, 3530 (2000). |
| 32 |
T. Helgaker, M. Watson, and N. C. Handy,
J. Chem. Phys. 113, 9402 (2000). |
| 33 |
V. Barone, J. E. Peralta, R. H.
Contreras, and J. P. Snyder, J. Phys. Chem. A 106, 5607
(2002). |
| 34 |
J. E. Peralta, R. H. Contreras, J. R.
Cheeseman, M. J. Frisch, and G. E. Scuseria, in prep.
(2003). |
| 35 |
K. L. Bak, P. Jorgensen, T. Helgaker, K.
Ruud, and H. J. A. Jensen, J. Chem. Phys. 98, 8873
(1993). |
| 36 |
J. Autschbach, T. Ziegler, S. J. A. van
Gisbergen, and E. J. Baerends, J. Chem. Phys. 116, 6930
(2002). |
| 37 |
J. E. Rice and N. C. Handy, J. Chem.
Phys. 94, 4959 (1991). |
| 38 |
J. E. Rice and N. C. Handy, Int. J.
Quant. Chem. 43, 91 (1992). |
| 39 |
T. Helgaker, K. Ruud, K. L. Bak, P.
Jorgensen, and J. Olsen, Faraday Discuss. 99, 165
(1994). |
| 40 |
P. J. Stephens, F. J. Devlin, J. R.
Cheeseman, M. J. Frisch, and C. Rosini, Organic Letters 4, 4595
(2002). |
| 41 |
P. J. Stephens, F. J. Devlin, J. R.
Cheeseman, M. J. Frisch, O. Bortolini, and P. Besse, Chirality 14,
(2002). |
| 42 |
S. Dapprich, I. Komáromi, K. S. Byun, K.
Morokuma, and M. J. Frisch, J. Mol. Struct. (Theochem) 462, 1
(1999). |
| 43 |
W. H. Miller, in Potential Energy
Surfaces and Dynamical Calculations, Ed. D. G. Truhlar (Plenum, New
York, 1981) 265. |
| 44 |
V. Barone, J. Comp. Chem. in prep.
(2003). |
| 45 |
W. H. Miller, N. C. Handy, and J. E.
Adams, J. Chem. Phys. 72, 99 (1980). |
| 46 |
D. A. Clabo, W. D. Allen, R. B.
Remington, Y. Yamaguchi, and H. F. Schaefer III, Chemical Physics
123, 187 (1988). |
| 47 |
C. Minichino and V. Barone, J. Chem.
Phys. 100, 3717 (1994). |
| 48 |
V. Barone and C. Minichino, Theochem
330, 365 (1995). |
| 49 |
R. F. Curl Jr., Mol. Phys. 9, 585
(1965). |
| 50 |
J. Gauss, K. Ruud, and T. Helgaker, J.
Chem. Phys. 105, 2804 (1996). |
| 51 |
V. Barone, Chem. Phys. Lett. 262, 201
(1996). |
| 52 |
F. Neese, J. Chem. Phys. 115, 11080
(2001). |
| 53 |
H. M. Pickett, J. Mol. Spec. 148, 317
(1991). |
| 54 |
J. Tomasi, R. Cammi, B. Mennucci, C.
Cappelli, and S. Corni, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 4, 5697
(2002). |
| 55 |
B. Mennucci, J. Tomasi, R. Cammi, J. R.
Cheeseman, M. J. Frisch, F. J. Devlin, S. Gabriel, and P. J.
Stephens, J. Phys. Chem. A 106, 6102 (2002). |
| 56 |
C. Cappelli, S. Corni, B. Mennucci, R.
Cammi, and J. Tomasi, J. Phys. Chem. A 106, 12331
(2002). |
| 57 |
K. N. Kudin and G. E. Scuseria, J. Chem.
Phys. 111, 2351 (1999). |
| 58 |
K. N. Kudin, G. E. Scuseria, and E.
Cancès, J. Chem. Phys. 116, 8255 (2002). |
| 59 |
J. Harris, Phys. Rev. B. 31, 1770
(1985). |
| 60 |
B. I. Dunlap, J. Chem. Phys. 78, 3140
(1983). |
| 61 |
B. I. Dunlap, J. Mol. Struct. (Theochem)
529, 37 (2000). |
| 62 |
J. C. Burant, K. Kudin, G. E. Scuseria,
G. W. Trucks, and M. J. Frisch, in prep. (2003). |
| 63 |
M. Douglas and N. M. Kroll, Ann. Phys.
(NY) 82, 89 (1974). |
| 64 |
B. A. Hess, Phys. Rev. A 32, 756
(1985). |
| 65 |
B. A. Hess, Phys. Rev. A 33, 3742
(1986). |
| 66 |
G. Jansen and B. A. Hess, Phys. Rev. A
39, 6016 (1989). |
| 67 |
M. Barysz and A. J. Sadlej, Theochem
573, 181 (2001). |
| 68 |
W. A. deJong, R. J. Harrison, and D. A.
Dixon, J. Chem. Phys. 114, 48 (2001). |
| 69 |
N. C. Handy and A. J. Cohen, Mol. Phys.
99, 403 (2001). |
| 70 |
J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M.
Ernzerhof, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865 (1996). |
| 71 |
J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M.
Ernzerhof, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 1396 (1997). |
| 72 |
A. D. Becke, J. Chem. Phys. 104, 1040
(1996). |
| 73 |
T. Van Voorhis and G. E. Scuseria, J.
Chem. Phys. 109, 400 (1998). |
| 74 |
A. D. Boese and N. C. Handy, J. Chem.
Phys. 114, 5497 (2001). |
| 75 |
H. L. Schmider and A. D. Becke, J. Chem.
Phys. 108, 9624 (1998). |
| 76 |
F. A. Hamprecht, A. J. Cohen, D. J.
Tozer, and N. C. Handy, J. Chem. Phys. 109, 6264
(1998). |
| 77 |
P. J. Wilson, T. J. Bradley, and D. J.
Tozer, J. Chem. Phys. 115, 9233 (2001). |
| 78 |
L. A. Curtiss, K. Raghavachari, P. C.
Redfern, V. Rassolov, and J. A. Pople, J. Chem Phys. 109, 7764
(1998). |
| 79 |
L. A. Curtiss, P. C. Redfern, K.
Raghavachari, V. Rassolov, and J. A. Pople, J. Chem. Phys. 110, 4703
(1999). |
| 80 |
S. Parthiban and J. M. L. Martin, J.
Chem. Phys. 114, 6014 (2001). |
| 81 |
J. M. L. Martin and G. de Oliveira, J.
Chem. Phys. 111, 1843 (1999). |
| 82 |
E. V. R. de Castro and F. E. Jorge, J.
Chem. Phys. 108, 5225 (1998). |
| 83 |
A. D. Becke, J. Chem. Phys. 107, 8554
(1997). |
| 84 |
J. A. Montgomery Jr., M. J. Frisch, and
J. M. L. Martin, in prep (2003). |
|