posted on 2024-05-15, 23:46authored byYann Damour, Anthony Scemama, Denis Jacquemin, Fábris Kossoski, Pierre-François Loos
We reexamine ΔCCSD, a state-specific coupled-cluster
(CC)
with single and double excitations (CCSD) approach that targets excited
states through the utilization of non-Aufbau determinants. This methodology
is particularly efficient when dealing with doubly excited states,
a domain in which the standard equation-of-motion CCSD (EOM-CCSD)
formalism falls short. Our goal here to evaluate the effectiveness
of ΔCCSD when applied to other types of excited states, comparing
its consistency and accuracy with EOM-CCSD. To this end, we report
a benchmark on excitation energies computed with the ΔCCSD and
EOM-CCSD methods for a set of molecular excited-state energies that
encompasses not only doubly excited states but also doublet–doublet
transitions and (singlet and triplet) singly excited states of closed-shell
systems. In the latter case, we rely on a minimalist version of multireference
CC known as the two-determinant CCSD method to compute the excited
states. Our data set, consisting of 276 excited states stemming from
the quest database [Véril et al., WIREs Comput.
Mol. Sci.2021, 11, e1517],
provides a significant base to draw general conclusions concerning
the accuracy of ΔCCSD. Except for the doubly excited states,
we found that ΔCCSD underperforms EOM-CCSD. For doublet–doublet
transitions, the difference between the mean absolute errors (MAEs)
of the two methodologies (of 0.10 and 0.07 eV) is less pronounced
than that obtained for singly excited states of closed-shell systems
(MAEs of 0.15 and 0.08 eV). This discrepancy is largely attributed
to a greater number of excited states in the latter set exhibiting
multiconfigurational characters, which are more challenging for ΔCCSD.
We also found typically small improvements by employing state-specific
optimized orbitals.