Which quantum statistics–classical dynamics method is best for water?
Author(s) -
Raz L. Benson,
George Trenins,
Stuart C. Althorpe
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
faraday discussions
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.255
H-Index - 110
eISSN - 1364-5498
pISSN - 1359-6640
DOI - 10.1039/c9fd00077a
Subject(s) - quantum , statistical physics , dynamics (music) , statistics , quantum dynamics , physics , mathematics , quantum mechanics , acoustics
There are a variety of methods for including nuclear quantum effects in dynamics simulations by combining quantum Boltzmann statistics with classical dynamics. Among them are thermostatted ring-polymer molecular dynamics (TRPMD), centroid molecular dynamics (CMD), quasi-centroid molecular dynamics (QCMD), and the linearised semi-classical initial value representation (LSC-IVR). Here we make a systematic comparison of these methods by calculating the infrared spectrum of water in the gas phase, and in the liquid and ice phases (using the q-TIP4P/F model potential). Some of these results are taken from previous work, and some of them are new (including the LSC-IVR calculations for ice, and extensions of all the spectra into the near-infrared region dominated by overtone and combination bands). Our results suggest that QCMD is the best method for reproducing fundamental transitions in the spectrum, and that LSC-IVR gives the best overall description of the spectrum (albeit with large errors in the bend fundamental band caused by zero-point-energy leakage). The TRPMD method gives damped spectra that line up with the QCMD spectra, and is by far the cheapest method.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom