Search for: All records

The revised, regularized Tao–Mo (rregTM) exchange-correlation density functional approximation (DFA) [A. Patra, S. Jana, and P. Samal, J. Chem. Phys. 153, 184112 (2020) and Jana et al., J. Chem. Phys. 155, 024103 (2021)] resolves the order-of-limits problem in the original TM formulation while preserving its valuable essential behaviors. Those include performance on standard thermochemistry and solid data sets that is competitive with that of the most widely explored meta-generalized-gradient-approximation DFAs (SCAN and r2SCAN) while also providing superior performance on elemental solid magnetization. Puzzlingly however, rregTM proved to be intractable for de-orbitalization via the approach of Mejía-Rodríguez and Trickey [Phys. Rev. A 96, 052512 (2017)]. We report investigation that leads to diagnosis of how the regularization in rregTM of the z indicator functions (z = the ratio of the von-Weizsäcker and Kohn–Sham kinetic energy densities) leads to non-physical behavior. We propose a simpler regularization that eliminates those oddities and that can be calibrated to reproduce the good error patterns of rregTM. We denote this version as simplified, regularized Tao–Mo, sregTM. We also show that it is unnecessary to use rregTM correlation with sregTM exchange: Perdew–Burke–Ernzerhof correlation is sufficient. The subsequent paper shows how sregTM enables some progress on de-orbitalization. 

In Paper I [H. Francisco, A. C. Cancio, and S. B. Trickey, J. Chem. Phys. 159, 214102 (2023)], we gave a regularization of the Tao–Mo exchange functional that removes the order-of-limits problem in the original Tao–Mo form and also eliminates the unphysical behavior introduced by an earlier regularization while essentially preserving compliance with the second-order gradient expansion. The resulting simplified, regularized (sregTM) functional delivers performance on standard molecular and solid state test sets equal to that of the earlier revised, regularized Tao–Mo functional. Here, we address de-orbitalization of that new sregTM into a pure density functional. We summarize the failures of the Mejía-Rodríguez and Trickey de-orbitalization strategy [Phys. Rev. A 96, 052512 (2017)] when used with both versions. We discuss how those failures apparently arise in the so-called z′ indicator function and in substitutes for the reduced density Laplacian in the parent functionals. Then, we show that the sregTM functional can be de-orbitalized somewhat well with a rather peculiarly parameterized version of the previously used deorbitalizer. We discuss, briefly, a de-orbitalization that works in the sense of reproducing error patterns but that apparently succeeds by cancelation of major qualitative errors associated with the de-orbitalized indicator functions α and z, hence, is not recommended. We suggest that the same issue underlies the earlier finding of comparatively mediocre performance of the de-orbitalized Tao–Perdew–Staroverov–Scuseri functional. Our work demonstrates that the intricacy of such two-indicator functionals magnifies the errors introduced by the Mejía-Rodríguez and Trickey de-orbitalization approach in ways that are extremely difficult to analyze and correct. 

The deviations from linearity of the energy as a function of the number of electrons that arise with current approximations to the exchange–correlation (XC) energy functional have important consequences for the frontier eigenvalues of molecules and the corresponding valence-band maxima for solids. In this work, we present an analysis of the exact theory that allows one to infer the effects of such approximations on the highest occupied and lowest unoccupied molecular orbital eigenvalues. Then, we show the importance of the asymptotic behavior of the XC potential in the generalized gradient approximation (GGA) in the case of the NCAPR functional (nearly correct asymptotic potential revised) for determining the shift of the frontier orbital eigenvalues toward the exact values. Thereby we establish a procedure at the GGA level of refinement that allows one to make a single calculation to determine the ionization potential, the electron affinity, and the hardness of molecules (and its solid counterpart, the bandgap) with an accuracy equivalent to that obtained for those properties through energy differences, a procedure that requires three calculations. For solids, the accuracy achieved for the bandgap lies rather close to that which is obtained through hybrid XC energy functionals, but those also demand much greater computational effort than what is required with the simple NCAPR GGA calculation. 

In this paper, the history, present status, and future of density-functional theory (DFT) is informally reviewed and discussed by 70 workers in the field, including molecular scientists, materials scientists, method developers and practitioners. The format of the paper is that of a roundtable discussion, in which the participants express and exchange views on DFT in the form of 302 individual contributions, formulated as responses to a preset list of 26 questions. Supported by a bibliography of 777 entries, the paper represents a broad snapshot of DFT, anno 2022.