Assessment of Orbital-Optimized MP2.5 for Thermochemistry and Kinetics: Dramatic Failures of Standard Perturbation Theory Approaches for Aromatic Bond Dissociation Energies and Barrier Heights of Radical Reactions

Soydas E., Bozkaya U.

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL THEORY AND COMPUTATION, vol.11, no.4, pp.1564-1573, 2015 (Peer-Reviewed Journal) identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 11 Issue: 4
  • Publication Date: 2015
  • Doi Number: 10.1021/ct501184w
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded, Scopus
  • Page Numbers: pp.1564-1573


An assessment of orbital-optimized MP2.5 (OMP2.5) [Bozkaya, U.; Sherrill, C. D. J. Chem. Phys. 2014, 141, 204105] for thermochemistry and kinetics is presented. The OMP2.5 method is applied to closed- and open-shell reaction energies, barrier heights, and aromatic bond dissociation energies. The performance of OMP2.5 is compared with that of the MP2, OMP2, MP2.5, MP3, OMP3, CCSD, and CCSD(T) methods. For most of the test sets, the OMP2.5 method performs better than MP2.5 and CCSD, and provides accurate results. For barrier heights of radical reactions and aromatic bond dissociation energies OMP2.5-MP2.5, OMP2-MP2, and OMP3-MP3 differences become obvious. Especially, for aromatic bond dissociation energies, standard perturbation theory (MP) approaches dramatically fail, providing mean absolute errors (MAEs) of 22.5 (MP2), 17.7 (MP2.5), and 12.8 (MP3) kcal mol(-1), while the MAE values of the orbital-optimized counterparts are 2.7, 2.4, and 2.4 kcal mol(-1), respectively. Hence, there are 5-8-folds reductions in errors when optimized orbitals are employed. Our results demonstrate that standard MP approaches dramatically fail when the reference wave function suffers from the spin-contamination problem. On the other hand, the OMP2.5 method can reduce spin-contamination in the unrestricted Hartree-Fock (UHF) initial guess orbitals. For overall evaluation, we conclude that the OMP2.5 method is very helpful not only for challenging open-shell systems and transition-states but also for closed-shell molecules. Hence, one may prefer OMP2.5 over MP2.5 and CCSD as an O(N-6) method, where N is the number of basis functions, for thermochemistry and kinetics. The cost of the OMP2.5 method is comparable with that of CCSD for energy computations. However, for analytic gradient computations, the OMP2.5 method is only half as expensive as CCSD.