Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 28, 2025

Visualizing Uniaxial-strain Manipulation of Antiferromagnetic Domains in Fe1+YTe Using a Spin-polarized Scanning Tunneling Microscope
Published on: March 24, 2019
Predicting Magnetic Coupling and Spin-Polarization Energy in Triangulene Analogues
Hongde Yu1, Jianwei Sun2, Thomas Heine1,3,4
1Faculty of Chemistry and Food Chemistry, TU Dresden, 01069 Dresden, Germany.
Abstract:
Triangulene and its analogue metal-free magnetic systems have garnered increasing attention since their discovery. Predicting the magnetic coupling and spin-polarization energy with quantitative accuracy is beyond the predictive power of today's density functional theory (DFT) due to their intrinsic multireference character. Herein, we create a benchmark dataset of 25 magnetic systems with nonlocal spin densities, including the triangulene monomer, dimer, and their analogues. We calculate the magnetic coupling (J) and spin-polarization energy (ΔEspin) of these systems using complete active space self-consistent field (CASSCF) and coupled-cluster methods as high-quality reference values. This reference data is then used to benchmark 22 DFT functionals commonly used in material science. Our results show that, while some functionals consistently correctly predict the qualitative character of the ground state, achieving quantitative accuracy with small relative errors is currently not feasible. PBE0, M06-2X, and MN15 are predicting the correct electronic ground state for all systems investigated here and also have the lowest mean absolute error for predicting both ΔEspin (0.34, 0.32, and 0.31 eV) and J (11.74, 12.66, and 10.64 meV). They may therefore also serve as starting points for higher-level methods such as the GW or the random phase approximation. As other functionals fail for the prediction of the ground state, they cannot be recommended for metal-free magnetic systems.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
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...
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...
¹H NMR: Long-Range Coupling
In alkenes, spin information is communicated via σ–π overlap, as seen in allylic (four-bond) and homoallylic (five-bond) couplings. These coupling interactions are stronger when the σ bond is parallel to the alkene...
Spin–Spin Coupling: One-Bond Coupling
NMR Spectroscopy: Spin–Spin Coupling

