ArticleJournal of chemical theory and computation2023
Automated Active Space Selection with Dipole Moments.
Article in Journal of chemical theory and computation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Automated Active Space Selection with CASCI Dipole Moments.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2026Article
- QCMaquis 4.0: Multipurpose Electronic, Vibrational, and Vibronic Structure and Dynamics Calculations with the Density Matrix Renormalization Group.The journal of physical chemistry. A · 2025Article
- Electronic Structure Methods for Simulating Flavin's Spectroscopy and Photophysics: Comparison of Multi-reference, TD-DFT, and Single-Reference Wave Function Methods.The journal of physical chemistry. B · 2024Article
- Organic Reactivity Made Easy and Accurate with Automated Multireference Calculations.ACS central science · 2024Article
- Characterizing Conical Intersections in DNA/RNA Nucleobases with Multiconfigurational Wave Functions of Varying Active Space Size.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multireference calculations can provide accurate information of systems with strong correlation, which have increasing importance in the development of new molecules and materials. However, selecting a suitable active space for multireference calculations is nontrivial, and the selection of an unsuitable active space can sometimes lead to results that are not physically meaningful. Active space selection often requires significant human input, and the selection that leads to reasonable results often goes beyond chemical intuition. In this work, we have developed and evaluated two protocols for automated selection of the active space for multireference calculations based on a simple physical observable, the dipole moment, for molecules with nonzero ground-state dipole moments. One protocol is based on the ground-state dipole moment, and the other is based on the excited-state dipole moments. To evaluate the protocols, we constructed a dataset of 1275 active spaces from 25 molecules, each with 51 active space sizes considered, and have mapped out the relationship between the active space, dipole moments, and vertical excitation energies. We have demonstrated that, within this dataset, our protocols allow one to choose among a number of accessible active spaces one that is likely to give reasonable vertical excitation energies, especially for the first three excitations, with no parameters manually decided by the user. We show that, with large active spaces removed from consideration, the accuracy is similar and the time-to-solution can be reduced by more than 10 fold. We also show that the protocols can be applied to potential energy surface scans and determining the spin states of transition metal oxides.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.