Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Charge-transfer (CT) states are ubiquitous in modern organic electronics, yet their accurate theoretical description poses a challenge for common excited state methods. The recently introduced STGABS27 benchmark set provides highly accurate experimentally measured adiabatic energy gaps (Δ) between the lowest singlet and triplet excited states of thermally activated delayed fluorescence (TADF) emitters. While first studies revealed a remarkable performance of orbital-optimized state-specific ΔDFT and mixed results with TD-DFT and DFT/MRCI, this work explores the performance of correlated wave-function methods, namely second-order algebraic diagrammatic construction (ADC(2)) and second-order approximate coupled-cluster singles and doubles (CC2) in their canonical and spin-scaled variants. Owing to the polar nature of the states, a particular emphasis is placed on the dielectric solvent models. The results show that only a few models, namely the iterative state-specific COSMO solvation model in combination with spin-component-scaled or scaled opposite-spin (SCS/SOS) ADC(2) or CC2, are competitive with ΔDFT/PCM and achieve sub-kcal mol agreement with experimental singlet-triplet gaps, which is confirmed by cross-checks on emission energies. However, this performance comes with a hefty cost, as both models are roughly 100 times slower than similarly accurate ΔDFT/PCM-based models.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/d5cp02144h | DOI Listing |