Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 26, 2025

Computation of Atmospheric Concentrations of Molecular Clusters from ab initio Thermochemistry
Published on: April 8, 2020
State-Specific Coupled-Cluster Methods for Excited States
Yann Damour1, Anthony Scemama1, Denis Jacquemin2,3
1Laboratoire de Chimie et Physique Quantiques (UMR 5626), Université de Toulouse, CNRS, UPS, 31000 Toulouse, France.
Abstract:
We reexamine ΔCCSD, a state-specific coupled-cluster (CC) with single and double excitations (CCSD) approach that targets excited states through the utilization of non-Aufbau determinants. This methodology is particularly efficient when dealing with doubly excited states, a domain in which the standard equation-of-motion CCSD (EOM-CCSD) formalism falls short. Our goal here to evaluate the effectiveness of ΔCCSD when applied to other types of excited states, comparing its consistency and accuracy with EOM-CCSD. To this end, we report a benchmark on excitation energies computed with the ΔCCSD and EOM-CCSD methods for a set of molecular excited-state energies that encompasses not only doubly excited states but also doublet-doublet transitions and (singlet and triplet) singly excited states of closed-shell systems. In the latter case, we rely on a minimalist version of multireference CC known as the two-determinant CCSD method to compute the excited states. Our data set, consisting of 276 excited states stemming from the quest database [Véril et al., WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci. 2021, 11, e1517], provides a significant base to draw general conclusions concerning the accuracy of ΔCCSD. Except for the doubly excited states, we found that ΔCCSD underperforms EOM-CCSD. For doublet-doublet transitions, the difference between the mean absolute errors (MAEs) of the two methodologies (of 0.10 and 0.07 eV) is less pronounced than that obtained for singly excited states of closed-shell systems (MAEs of 0.15 and 0.08 eV). This discrepancy is largely attributed to a greater number of excited states in the latter set exhibiting multiconfigurational characters, which are more challenging for ΔCCSD. We also found typically small improvements by employing state-specific optimized orbitals.
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...
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...
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...
¹H NMR Signal Multiplicity: Splitting Patterns
Double Resonance Techniques: Overview
Spin decoupling is usually achieved by...
¹H NMR: Pople Notation
A proton...

