Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 3, 2026

Computation of Atmospheric Concentrations of Molecular Clusters from ab initio Thermochemistry
Published on: April 8, 2020
Benchmark coupled-cluster g-tensor calculations with full inclusion of the two-particle spin-orbit contributions
Ajith Perera1, Jürgen Gauss2, Prakash Verma1
1Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Texas Tech University, P.O. Box 41061, Lubbock, Texas 79409-1061, USA.
Abstract:
We present a parallel implementation to compute electron spin resonance g-tensors at the coupled-cluster singles and doubles (CCSD) level which employs the ACES III domain-specific software tools for scalable parallel programming, i.e., the super instruction architecture language and processor (SIAL and SIP), respectively. A unique feature of the present implementation is the exact (not approximated) inclusion of the five one- and two-particle contributions to the g-tensor [i.e., the mass correction, one- and two-particle paramagnetic spin-orbit, and one- and two-particle diamagnetic spin-orbit terms]. Like in a previous implementation with effective one-electron operators [J. Gauss et al., J. Phys. Chem. A 113, 11541-11549 (2009)], our implementation utilizes analytic CC second derivatives and, therefore, classifies as a true CC linear-response treatment. Therefore, our implementation can unambiguously appraise the accuracy of less costly effective one-particle schemes and provide a rationale for their widespread use. We have considered a large selection of radicals used previously for benchmarking purposes including those studied in earlier work and conclude that at the CCSD level, the effective one-particle scheme satisfactorily captures the two-particle effects less costly than the rigorous two-particle scheme. With respect to the performance of density functional theory (DFT), we note that results obtained with the B3LYP functional exhibit the best agreement with our CCSD results. However, in general, the CCSD results agree better with the experimental data than the best DFT/B3LYP results, although in most cases within the rather large experimental error bars.
Related Concept Videos
Spin–Spin Coupling: Two-Bond Coupling (Geminal Coupling)
The central atom need not be NMR-active because its electrons are affected by the electron polarization of the spin-active atoms. However, spin information is transmitted less effectively than in one-bond coupling, and 2J values are usually weaker than 1J values. The energy of...
Spin–Spin Coupling Constant: Overview
Qualitatively, any spin plus-half nucleus polarizes the spins of its electrons to the minus-half state. Consequently, the paired electron in the hydrogen–carbon bond must...
Spin–Spin Coupling: One-Bond Coupling
¹H NMR: Interpreting Distorted and Overlapping Signals
As Δν decreases and the signals move closer, the doublets appear increasingly distorted. The intensities of the inner lines increase at the cost of those of the outer lines as the signals are...
Spin–Spin Coupling: Three-Bond Coupling (Vicinal Coupling)
The extent of coupling depends on the C‑C bond length, the two H‑C‑C angles, any electron-withdrawing substituents, and the dihedral angle between the involved orbitals. The...
Atomic Nuclei: Nuclear Spin State Population Distribution

