English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The importance of post-CCSD(T) corrections as high as CCSDTQ56 forground-state spectroscopic constants ($D_e$, $\omega_e$, $\omega_ex_e$, and$\alpha_e$) has been surveyed for a sample of two dozen mostly heavy-atomdiatomics spanning a broad range of static correlation strength. While CCSD(T)is known to be an unusually felicitous `Pauling point' between accuracy andcomputational cost, performance leaves something to be desired for moleculeswith strong static correlation. We find CCSDT(Q)$_\Lambda$ to be the next`sweet spot' up, of comparable or superior quality to the much more expensiveCCSDTQ. A similar comparison applies to CCSDTQ(5)$_\Lambda$ vs. CCSDTQ5, whileCCSDTQ5(6)$_\Lambda$ is essentially indistinguishable from CCSDTQ56. Acomposite of CCSD(T)-X2C/ACV5Z-X2C with [CCSDT(Q)$_\Lambda$ -- CCSD(T)]/cc-pVTZor even cc-pVDZ basis sets appears highly effective for computationalvibrational spectroscopy. Unlike CCSDT(Q) which breaks down for the ozonevibrational frequencies, CCSDT(Q)$_\Lambda$ handles them gracefully.

Post-CCSD(T) corrections to bond distances and vibrational frequencies: the power of $\Lambda$