Searching....

# 10.15.1 Eigenstate-Based Methods

(July 14, 2022)

For electron transfer (ET) and excitation energy transfer (EET) processes, the electronic coupling is one of the important parameters that determine their reaction rates. For ET, Q-Chem provides the coupling values calculated with the generalized Mulliken-Hush (GMH), 184 Cave R. J., Newton M. D.
Chem. Phys. Lett.
(1996), 249, pp. 15.
fragment charge difference (FCD), 1232 Voityuk A. A., Rösch N.
J. Chem. Phys.
(2002), 117, pp. 5607.
Boys localization, 1160 Subotnik J. E. et al.
J. Chem. Phys.
(2008), 129, pp. 244101.
and Edmiston-Ruedenbeg 1156 Subotnik J. E. et al.
J. Chem. Phys.
(2009), 130, pp. 234102.
localization schemes. For EET, options include fragment excitation difference (FED), 519 Hsu C.-P., You Z.-Q., Chen H.-C.
J. Phys. Chem. C
(2008), 112, pp. 1204.
fragment spin difference (FSD), 1328 You Z.-Q., Hsu C.-P.
J. Chem. Phys.
(2010), 133, pp. 074105.
occupied-virtual separated Boys localization, 1159 Subotnik J. E. et al.
J. Phys. Chem. A
(2010), 114, pp. 8665.
or Edmiston-Ruedenberg localization. 1156 Subotnik J. E. et al.
J. Chem. Phys.
(2009), 130, pp. 234102.
In all these schemes, a vertical excitation approach such as CIS or TDDFT is required, and the GMH, FCD, FED, FSD, Boys or ER coupling values are calculated based on the excited state results. More recently, the FED and FCD schemes have been extended to work with RAS-CI wavefunctions  729 Lin H.-H. et al.
J. Chem. Theory Comput.
(2019), 15, pp. 2246.
, 769 Manjanath A. et al.
J. Chem. Theory Comput.
(2022), 18, pp. 1017.
, which are multi-configurational in nature.

## 10.15.1.1 Two-state approximation

Under the two-state approximation, the diabatic reactant and product states are assumed to be a linear combination of the eigenstates. For ET, the choice of such linear combination is determined by a zero transition dipoles (GMH) or maximum charge differences (FCD). In the latter, a $2\times 2$ donor–acceptor charge difference matrix, $\Delta{\mathbf{q}}$, is defined, with elements

 $\Delta q_{mn}=q^{\textrm{D}}_{mn}-q^{\textrm{A}}_{mn}=\int_{{\mathbf{r}}\in% \textrm{D}}\rho_{mn}({\mathbf{r}})d{\mathbf{r}}-\int_{{\mathbf{r}}\in\textrm{A% }}\rho_{mn}({\mathbf{r}})d{\mathbf{r}}$ (10.89)

where $\rho_{mn}({\mathbf{r}})$ is the matrix element of the density operator between states $|m\rangle$ and $|n\rangle$.

For EET, a maximum excitation difference is assumed in the FED, in which an excitation difference matrix is similarly defined with elements

 $\Delta x_{mn}=x^{\textrm{D}}_{mn}-x^{\textrm{A}}_{mn}=\int_{{\mathbf{r}}\in% \textrm{D}}\rho_{\rm ex}^{(mn)}({\mathbf{r}})d{\mathbf{r}}-\int_{{\mathbf{r}}% \in\textrm{A}}\rho_{\rm ex}^{(mn)}({\mathbf{r}})d{\mathbf{r}}$ (10.90)

where $\rho_{\rm ex}^{(mn)}({\mathbf{r}})$ is the sum of attachment and detachment densities for transition $|m\rangle\rightarrow|n\rangle$, as they correspond to the electron and hole densities in an excitation. In the FSD, a maximum spin difference is used and the corresponding spin difference matrix is defined with its elements as,

 $\Delta s_{mn}=s^{\textrm{D}}_{mn}-s^{\textrm{A}}_{mn}=\int_{{\mathbf{r}}\in% \textrm{D}}\sigma_{(mn)}({\mathbf{r}})d{\mathbf{r}}-\int_{{\mathbf{r}}\in% \textrm{A}}\sigma_{(mn)}({\mathbf{r}})d{\mathbf{r}}$ (10.91)

where $\sigma_{mn}(\mathbf{r})$ is the spin density, difference between $\alpha$-spin and $\beta$-spin densities, for transition from $|m\rangle\rightarrow|n\rangle$.

Since Q-Chem uses a Mulliken population analysis for the integrations in Eqs. (10.89), (10.90), and (10.91), the matrices $\Delta{\mathbf{q}}$, $\Delta{\mathbf{x}}$ and $\Delta{\mathbf{s}}$ are not symmetric. To obtain a pair of orthogonal states as the diabatic reactant and product states, $\Delta{\mathbf{q}}$, $\Delta{\mathbf{x}}$ and $\Delta{\mathbf{s}}$ are symmetrized in Q-Chem. Specifically,

 $\displaystyle\overline{\Delta q}_{mn}$ $\displaystyle=(\Delta q_{mn}+\Delta q_{nm})/2$ (10.92a) $\displaystyle\overline{\Delta x}_{mn}$ $\displaystyle=(\Delta x_{mn}+\Delta x_{nm})/2$ (10.92b) $\displaystyle\overline{\Delta s}_{mn}$ $\displaystyle=(\Delta s_{mn}+\Delta s_{nm})/2$ (10.92c)

The final coupling values are obtained as listed below:

• For GMH,

 $V_{\textrm{ET}}=\frac{(E_{n}-E_{m})\left|\vec{\mu}_{mn}\right|}{\sqrt{(\vec{% \mu}_{m}-\vec{\mu}_{n})^{2}+4\left|\vec{\mu}_{mn}\right|^{2}}}$ (10.93)
• For FCD,

 $V_{\textrm{ET}}=\frac{(E_{n}-E_{m})\overline{\Delta q}_{mn}}{\sqrt{(\Delta q_{% m}-\Delta q_{n})^{2}+4\overline{\Delta q}^{2}_{mn}}}$ (10.94)
• For FED,

 $V_{\textrm{EET}}=\frac{(E_{n}-E_{m})\overline{\Delta x}_{mn}}{\sqrt{(\Delta x_% {m}-\Delta x_{n})^{2}+4\overline{\Delta x}^{2}_{mn}}}$ (10.95)
• For FSD,

 $V_{\textrm{EET}}=\frac{(E_{n}-E_{m})\overline{\Delta s}_{mn}}{\sqrt{(\Delta s_% {m}-\Delta s_{n})^{2}+4\overline{\Delta s}^{2}_{mn}}}$ (10.96)

Q-Chem provides the option to control FED, FSD, FCD and GMH calculations after a single-excitation calculation, such as CIS and TDDFT. To obtain ET coupling values using GMH (FCD) scheme, one should set $rem variables STS_GMH (STS_FCD) to be TRUE. Similarly, a FED (FSD) calculation is turned on by setting the$rem variable STS_FED (STS_FSD) to be TRUE. In FCD, FED and FSD calculations, the donor and acceptor fragments are defined via the $rem variables STS_DONOR and STS_ACCEPTOR. It is necessary to arrange the atomic order in the$molecule section such that the atoms in the donor (acceptor) fragment is in one consecutive block. The ordering numbers of beginning and ending atoms for the donor and acceptor blocks are included in $rem variables STS_DONOR and STS_ACCEPTOR. The couplings will be calculated between all choices of excited states with the same spin. In FSD, FCD and GMH calculations, the coupling value between the excited and reference (ground) states will be included, but in FED, the ground state is not included in the analysis. It is important to select excited states properly, according to the distribution of charge or excitation, among other characteristics, such that the coupling obtained can properly describe the electronic coupling of the corresponding process in the two-state approximation. ## 10.15.1.2 FED and FCD with RAS-CI Within the ambit of the single excitation theory such as the CIS or TDDFT, one can easily obtain analytical expressions for the matrix elements of the excitation density and can therefore, use Eq. 10.95 to compute electronic couplings between adiabatic states. However, for multiexcitation wavefunctions such as those obtained from RAS-CI no simple expressions exist for the off-diagonal elements in the excitation difference ($\Delta x_{mn}$ in Eq. 10.95). To circumvent this challenge, a new scheme was developed known as $\theta$-FED 646 Kue K. Y., Claudio G. C., Hsu C.-P. J. Chem. Theory Comput. (2018), 14, pp. 1304. , 729 Lin H.-H. et al. J. Chem. Theory Comput. (2019), 15, pp. 2246. , 769 Manjanath A. et al. J. Chem. Theory Comput. (2022), 18, pp. 1017. . In this approach, the diabatic states are assumed to be functions of a mixing angle $\theta$. Consequently, the excitation difference density ($\mathbf{\Delta x}$ in Eqs 10.90 and 10.95) is dependent on $\theta$. In order to obtain ‘ideal’ diabatic states, a scan of $\theta$ is performed from $-\pi/4$ to $\pi/4$ to maximize the difference of the excitation, i.e.,  $\displaystyle\theta_{\text{max}}=\operatorname*{arg\,max}_{-\pi/4<\theta<\pi/4% }|\mathbf{\Delta x}_{\text{i}}(\theta)-\mathbf{\Delta x}_{\text{f}}(\theta)|,$ (10.97) with ‘i’ and ‘f’ indicating the initial and final diabatic states, respectively. The corresponding $\theta$-dependent coupling can then be written as  $\displaystyle V_{\theta\text{-FED}}=\frac{E_{n}-E_{m}}{2}\sin 2\theta_{\text{% max}},$ (10.98) Fortunately, one can still use Eq. 10.94 to compute ET couplings between two adiabatic states for FCD with RAS-CI. This is because the charge difference matrix ($\mathbf{\Delta q}$ in Eqs 10.89 and 10.94) depends on the one-particle (for $\Delta q_{m/n}$) and transition density matrices (for $\Delta q_{mn/nm}$), which are also easily obtainable with the RAS-CI wavefunctions. The$rem variables STS_FED, STS_FCD, STS_DONOR, and STS_ACCEPTOR also apply to FCD and FED calculations with RAS-CI.

STS_GMH

STS_GMH
Control the calculation of GMH for ET couplings.
TYPE:
LOGICAL
DEFAULT:
FALSE
OPTIONS:
FALSE Do not perform a GMH calculation. TRUE Include a GMH calculation.
RECOMMENDATION:
When set to true computes Mulliken-Hush electronic couplings. It yields the generalized Mulliken-Hush couplings as well as the transition dipole moments for each pair of excited states and for each excited state with the ground state.

STS_FCD

STS_FCD
Control the calculation of FCD for ET couplings.
TYPE:
LOGICAL
DEFAULT:
FALSE
OPTIONS:
FALSE Do not perform an FCD calculation. TRUE Include an FCD calculation.
RECOMMENDATION:
None

STS_FED

STS_FED
Control the calculation of FED for EET couplings.
TYPE:
LOGICAL
DEFAULT:
FALSE
OPTIONS:
FALSE Do not perform a FED calculation. TRUE Include a FED calculation.
RECOMMENDATION:
None

STS_FSD

STS_FSD
Control the calculation of FSD for EET couplings.
TYPE:
LOGICAL
DEFAULT:
FALSE
OPTIONS:
FALSE Do not perform a FSD calculation. TRUE Include a FSD calculation.
RECOMMENDATION:
For RCIS triplets, FSD and FED are equivalent. FSD will be automatically switched off and perform a FED calculation.

STS_DONOR

STS_DONOR
Define the donor fragment.
TYPE:
STRING
DEFAULT:
0 No donor fragment is defined.
OPTIONS:
$i$-$j$ Donor fragment is in the $i$th atom to the $j$th atom.
RECOMMENDATION:
Note no space between the hyphen and the numbers $i$ and $j$.

STS_ACCEPTOR

STS_ACCEPTOR
Define the acceptor molecular fragment.
TYPE:
STRING
DEFAULT:
0 No acceptor fragment is defined.
OPTIONS:
$i$-$j$ Acceptor fragment is in the $i$th atom to the $j$th atom.
RECOMMENDATION:
Note no space between the hyphen and the numbers $i$ and $j$.

STS_MOM

STS_MOM
Control calculation of the transition moments between excited states in the CIS and TDDFT calculations (including SF variants).
TYPE:
LOGICAL
DEFAULT:
FALSE
OPTIONS:
FALSE Do not calculate state-to-state transition moments. TRUE Do calculate state-to-state transition moments.
RECOMMENDATION:
When set to true requests the state-to-state dipole transition moments for all pairs of excited states and for each excited state with the ground state.

Example 10.47  A GMH & FCD calculation to analyze electron transfer couplings in an ethylene and a methaniminium cation.

$molecule 1 1 C 0.679952 0.000000 0.000000 N -0.600337 0.000000 0.000000 H 1.210416 0.940723 0.000000 H 1.210416 -0.940723 0.000000 H -1.131897 -0.866630 0.000000 H -1.131897 0.866630 0.000000 C -5.600337 0.000000 0.000000 C -6.937337 0.000000 0.000000 H -5.034682 0.927055 0.000000 H -5.034682 -0.927055 0.000000 H -7.502992 -0.927055 0.000000 H -7.502992 0.927055 0.000000$end

$rem METHOD CIS BASIS 6-31+G CIS_N_ROOTS 20 CIS_SINGLETS true CIS_TRIPLETS false STS_GMH true !turns on the GMH calculation STS_FCD true !turns on the FCD calculation STS_DONOR 1-6 !define the donor fragment as atoms 1-6 for FCD calc. STS_ACCEPTOR 7-12 !define the acceptor fragment as atoms 7-12 for FCD calc. MEM_STATIC 200 !increase static memory for a CIS job with larger basis set$end


Example 10.48  An FED calculation to analyze excitation energy transfer couplings in a pair of stacked ethylenes.

$molecule 0 1 C 0.670518 0.000000 0.000000 H 1.241372 0.927754 0.000000 H 1.241372 -0.927754 0.000000 C -0.670518 0.000000 0.000000 H -1.241372 -0.927754 0.000000 H -1.241372 0.927754 0.000000 C 0.774635 0.000000 4.500000 H 1.323105 0.936763 4.500000 H 1.323105 -0.936763 4.500000 C -0.774635 0.000000 4.500000 H -1.323105 -0.936763 4.500000 H -1.323105 0.936763 4.500000$end

$rem METHOD CIS BASIS 3-21G CIS_N_ROOTS 20 CIS_SINGLETS true CIS_TRIPLETS false STS_FED true STS_DONOR 1-6 STS_ACCEPTOR 7-12$end


Example 10.49  A RAS-FCD calculation to analyze electron transfer couplings in an ethylene dimer.

$comment RASCI for Hole Transfer Stacked-Ethylene / DZ*$end

$molecule 1 2 C 0.670518 0.000000 0.000000 H 1.241372 0.927754 0.000000 H 1.241372 -0.927754 0.000000 C -0.670518 0.000000 0.000000 H -1.241372 -0.927754 0.000000 H -1.241372 0.927754 0.000000 C 0.774635 0.000000 4.000000 H 1.323105 0.936763 4.000000 H 1.323105 -0.936763 4.000000 C -0.774635 0.000000 4.000000 H -1.323105 -0.936763 4.000000 H -1.323105 0.936763 4.000000$end

$rem JOBTYPE SP BASIS DZ* CORRELATION RASCI UNRESTRICTED FALSE RAS_ROOTS 5 RAS_ACT 4 RAS_ELEC_ALPHA 2 RAS_ELEC_BETA 1 RAS_OCC 14 STS_FCD TRUE STS_ACCEPTOR 1-6 STS_DONOR 7-12 RAS_SPIN_MULT 1$end


Example 10.50  A RAS-FED calculation to analyze excitation energy transfer couplings in an ethylene dimer.

$comment RASCI for Excitation Energy Transfer Stacked-Ethylene / DZ*$end

$molecule 0 1 C 0.670518 0.000000 0.000000 H 1.241372 0.927754 0.000000 H 1.241372 -0.927754 0.000000 C -0.670518 0.000000 0.000000 H -1.241372 -0.927754 0.000000 H -1.241372 0.927754 0.000000 C 0.774635 0.000000 4.000000 H 1.323105 0.936763 4.000000 H 1.323105 -0.936763 4.000000 C -0.774635 0.000000 4.000000 H -1.323105 -0.936763 4.000000 H -1.323105 0.936763 4.000000$end

$rem JOBTYPE SP BASIS DZ* CORRELATION RASCI UNRESTRICTED FALSE RAS_ROOTS 5 RAS_ACT 4 RAS_ELEC_ALPHA 2 RAS_ELEC_BETA 2 RAS_OCC 14 STS_FED TRUE STS_ACCEPTOR 1-6 STS_DONOR 7-12 RAS_SPIN_MULT 1$end


## 10.15.1.3 Multi-state treatments

When dealing with multiple charge or electronic excitation centers, diabatic states can be constructed with Boys 1160 Subotnik J. E. et al.
J. Chem. Phys.
(2008), 129, pp. 244101.
or Edmiston-Ruedenberg 1156 Subotnik J. E. et al.
J. Chem. Phys.
(2009), 130, pp. 234102.
localization. In this case, we construct diabatic states $\left\{\left|\Xi_{I}\right>\right\}$ as linear combinations of adiabatic states $\left\{\left|\Phi_{I}\right>\right\}$ with a general rotation matrix $\bf U$ that is $N_{\mathrm{state}}\times N_{\mathrm{state}}$ in size:

 $\left|\Xi_{I}\right>=\sum_{J=1}^{N_{\mathrm{states}}}\left|\Phi_{J}\right>U_{% ji}\qquad\qquad I=1\ldots N_{\mathrm{states}}$ (10.99)

The adiabatic states can be produced with any method, in principle, but the Boys/ER-localized diabatization methods have been implemented thus far only for CIS, TDDFT or RASCI (section 7.12.6) methods in Q-Chem. In analogy to orbital localization, Boys-localized diabatization corresponds to maximizing the charge separation between diabatic state centers:

 $f_{\mathrm{Boys}}({\bf U})=f_{\mathrm{Boys}}(\{\Xi_{I}\})=\sum_{I,J=1}^{N_{% \mathrm{states}}}\bigl{|}\langle\Xi_{I}|\vec{\mu}|\Xi_{I}\rangle-\langle\Xi_{J% }|\vec{\mu}|\Xi_{J}\rangle\bigl{|}^{2}$ (10.100)

Here, $\vec{\mu}$ represents the dipole operator. ER-localized diabatization prescribes maximizing self-interaction energy:

 $f_{ER}({\bf U})=f_{\mathrm{ER}}(\left\{\Xi_{I}\right\})=\sum_{I=1}^{N_{\mathrm% {states}}}\int d\mathcal{\vec{R}}_{1}\int d\mathcal{\vec{R}}_{2}\frac{\langle% \Xi_{I}|\hat{\rho}(\mathcal{\vec{R}}_{2})|\Xi_{I}\rangle\langle\Xi_{I}|\hat{% \rho}(\mathcal{\vec{R}}_{1})|\Xi_{I}\rangle}{|\mathcal{\vec{R}}_{1}-\mathcal{% \vec{R}}_{2}|}$ (10.101)

where the density operator at position $\mathcal{\vec{R}}$ is

 $\hat{\rho}(\mathcal{\vec{R}})=\sum_{j}\delta(\mathcal{\vec{R}}-\vec{r}^{\,(j)})$ (10.102)

Here, $\vec{r}^{\,(j)}$ represents the position of the $j$th electron.

These models reflect different assumptions about the interaction of our quantum system with some fictitious external electric field/potential: $(i)$ if we assume a fictitious field that is linear in space, we arrive at Boys localization; $(ii)$ if we assume a fictitious potential energy that responds linearly to the charge density of our system, we arrive at ER localization. Note that in the two-state limit, Boys localized diabatization reduces nearly exactly to GMH. 1160 Subotnik J. E. et al.
J. Chem. Phys.
(2008), 129, pp. 244101.

As written down in Eq. (10.100), Boys localized diabatization applies only to charge transfer, not to energy transfer. Within the context of CIS or TDDFT calculations, one can easily extend Boys localized diabatization 1159 Subotnik J. E. et al.
J. Phys. Chem. A
(2010), 114, pp. 8665.
by separately localizing the occupied and virtual components of $\vec{\mu}$, $\vec{\mu}^{\mathrm{\,occ}}$ and $\vec{\mu}^{\mathrm{\,virt}}$:

 \displaystyle\begin{aligned} \displaystyle f_{\mathrm{BoysOV}}({\bf U})&% \displaystyle=f_{\mathrm{BoysOV}}(\{\Xi_{I}\})\\ &\displaystyle=\sum_{I,J=1}^{N_{\mathrm{states}}}\left(\bigl{|}\langle\Xi_{I}|% \vec{\mu}^{\mathrm{\,occ}}|\Xi_{I}\rangle-\langle\Xi_{J}|\vec{\mu}^{\mathrm{\,% occ}}|\Xi_{J}\rangle\bigl{|}^{2}+\bigl{|}\langle\Xi_{I}|\vec{\mu}^{\mathrm{% virt}}|\Xi_{I}\rangle-\langle\Xi_{J}|\vec{\mu}^{\mathrm{virt}}|\Xi_{J}\rangle% \bigr{|}^{2}\right)\end{aligned} (10.103)

where

 $|\Xi_{I}\rangle=\sum_{ia}t_{i}^{Ia}|\Phi_{i}^{a}\rangle$ (10.104)

and the occupied/virtual components are defined by

 $\displaystyle\left<\Xi_{I}\right|\vec{\mu}\left|\Xi_{J}\right>$ $\displaystyle=$ $\displaystyle\underbrace{\delta_{IJ}\sum_{i}\vec{\mu}_{ii}-\sum_{aij}t^{Ia}_{i% }t^{Ja}_{j}\vec{\mu}_{ij}}+\underbrace{\sum_{iba}t^{Ia}_{i}t^{Jb}_{i}\vec{\mu}% _{ab}}$ $\displaystyle\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\left<\Xi_{I}\right|\vec{\mu}^{\mathrm{\,occ}}\left% |\Xi_{J}\right>\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;+\;\;\left<\Xi_{I}\right|\vec{\mu}^{\mathrm{% virt}}\left|\Xi_{J}\right>$

Note that when we maximize the Boys OV function, we are simply performing Boys-localized diabatization separately on the electron attachment and detachment densities.

Finally, for energy transfer, it can be helpful to understand the origin of the diabatic couplings. To that end, we now provide the ability to decompose the diabatic coupling between diabatic states into Coulomb (J), Exchange (K) and one-electron (O) components: 1237 Vura-Weis J. et al.
J. Phys. Chem. C
(2010), 114, pp. 20449.

 $\displaystyle\left<\Xi_{P}\right|H\left|\Xi_{Q}\right>$ $\displaystyle=$ $\displaystyle\underbrace{\sum_{iab}t^{Pa}_{i}t^{Qb}_{i}F_{ab}-\sum_{ija}t^{Pa}% _{i}t^{Qa}_{j}F_{ij}}+\underbrace{\sum_{ijab}t^{Pa}_{i}t^{Qb}_{j}\left(ia|jb% \right)}-\underbrace{\sum_{ijab}t^{Pa}_{i}t^{Qb}_{j}\left(ij|ab\right)}$ (10.106) $\displaystyle\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;O\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;% \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;J\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;% \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;K$

BOYS_CIS_NUMSTATE

BOYS_CIS_NUMSTATE
Define how many states to mix with Boys localized diabatization. These states must be specified in the $localized_diabatization section. TYPE: INTEGER DEFAULT: 0 Do not perform Boys localized diabatization. OPTIONS: 2 to N where N is the number of CIS states requested (CIS_N_ROOTS) RECOMMENDATION: It is usually not wise to mix adiabatic states that are separated by more than a few eV or a typical reorganization energy in solvent. ER_CIS_NUMSTATE ER_CIS_NUMSTATE Define how many states to mix with ER localized diabatization. These states must be specified in the$localized_diabatization section.
TYPE:
INTEGER
DEFAULT:
0 Do not perform ER localized diabatization.
OPTIONS:
2 to N where N is the number of CIS states requested (CIS_N_ROOTS)
RECOMMENDATION:
It is usually not wise to mix adiabatic states that are separated by more than a few eV or a typical reorganization energy in solvent.

LOC_CIS_OV_SEPARATE

LOC_CIS_OV_SEPARATE
Decide whether or not to localized the “occupied” and “virtual” components of the localized diabatization function, i.e., whether to localize the electron attachments and detachments separately.
TYPE:
LOGICAL
DEFAULT:
FALSE Do not separately localize electron attachments and detachments.
OPTIONS:
TRUE
RECOMMENDATION:
If one wants to use Boys localized diabatization for energy transfer (as opposed to electron transfer) , this is a necessary option. ER is more rigorous technique, and does not require this OV feature, but will be somewhat slower.

CIS_DIABATH_DECOMPOSE

CIS_DIABATH_DECOMPOSE
Decide whether or not to decompose the diabatic coupling into Coulomb, exchange, and one-electron terms.
TYPE:
LOGICAL
DEFAULT:
FALSE Do not decompose the diabatic coupling.
OPTIONS:
TRUE
RECOMMENDATION:
These decompositions are most meaningful for electronic excitation transfer processes. Currently, available only for CIS, not for TDDFT diabatic states.

Example 10.51  A calculation using ER localized diabatization to construct the diabatic Hamiltonian and couplings between a square of singly-excited Helium atoms.

$molecule 0 1 he 0 -1.0 1.0 he 0 -1.0 -1.0 he 0 1.0 -1.0 he 0 1.0 1.0$end

$rem METHOD cis CIS_N_ROOTS 4 CIS_SINGLETS false CIS_TRIPLETS true BASIS 6-31g** SCF_CONVERGENCE 8 SYMMETRY false RPA false SYM_IGNORE true LOC_CIS_OV_SEPARATE false ! NOT localizing attachments/detachments separately. ER_CIS_NUMSTATE 4 ! using ER to mix 4 adiabatic states. CIS_DIABATh_DECOMPOSE true ! decompose diabatic couplings into ! Coulomb, exchange, and one-electron components.$end

$localized_diabatization On the next line, list which excited adiabatic states we want to mix. 1 2 3 4$end