PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 12759913

Optimized Slater-type basis sets for the elements 1-118.

Abstract

Seven different types of Slater type basis sets for the elements H (Z = 1) up to E118 (Z = 118), ranging from a double zeta valence quality up to a quadruple zeta valence quality, are tested in their performance in neutral atomic and diatomic oxide calculations. The exponents of the Slater type functions are optimized for the use in (scalar relativistic) zeroth-order regular approximated (ZORA) equations. Atomic tests reveal that, on average, the absolute basis set error of 0.03 kcal/mol in the density functional calculation of the valence spinor energies of the neutral atoms with the largest all electron basis set of quadruple zeta quality is lower than the average absolute difference of 0.16 kcal/mol in these valence spinor energies if one compares the results of ZORA equation with those of the fully relativistic Dirac equation. This average absolute basis set error increases to about 1 kcal/mol for the all electron basis sets of triple zeta valence quality, and to approximately 4 kcal/mol for the all electron basis sets of double zeta quality. The molecular tests reveal that, on average, the calculated atomization energies of 118 neutral diatomic oxides MO, where the nuclear charge Z of M ranges from Z = 1-118, with the all electron basis sets of triple zeta quality with two polarization functions added are within 1-2 kcal/mol of the benchmark results with the much larger all electron basis sets, which are of quadruple zeta valence quality with four polarization functions added. The accuracy is reduced to about 4-5 kcal/mol if only one polarization function is used in the triple zeta basis sets, and further reduced to approximately 20 kcal/mol if the all electron basis sets of double zeta quality are used. The inclusion of g-type STOs to the large benchmark basis sets had an effect of less than 1 kcal/mol in the calculation of the atomization energies of the group 2 and group 14 diatomic oxides. The basis sets that are optimized for calculations using the frozen core approximation (frozen core basis sets) have a restricted basis set in the core region compared to the all electron basis sets. On average, the use of these frozen core basis sets give atomic basis set errors that are approximately twice as large as the corresponding all electron basis set errors and molecular atomization energies that are close to the corresponding all electron results. Only if spin-orbit coupling is included in the frozen core calculations larger errors are found, especially for the heavier elements, due to the additional approximation that is made that the basis functions are orthogonalized on scalar relativistic core orbitals.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

E Van Lenthe, E J Baerends. 2003-07-15. Optimized Slater-type basis sets for the elements 1-118.. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcc.10255

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗