Systematic discrepancies between reference methods for noncovalent interactions within the S66 dataset

The accurate treatment of noncovalent interactions is necessary to model a wide range of applications, from molecular crystals to surface catalysts to aqueous solutions and many more. Quantum diffusion Monte Carlo (DMC) and coupled cluster theory with single, double, and perturbative triple excitations [CCSD(T)] are considered two widely trusted methods for treating noncovalent interactions. However, while they have been well-validated for small molecules, recent work has indicated that these two methods can disagree by more than 7.5 kcal/mol for larger systems. The origin of this discrepancy remains unknown. Moreover, the lack of systematic comparisons, particularly for medium-sized complexes, has made it difficult to identify which systems may be prone to such disagreements and the potential scale of these differences. In this work, we leverage the latest developments in DMC to compute interaction energies for the entire S66 dataset, containing 66 medium-sized complexes with a balanced representation of dispersion and electrostatic interactions. Comparison to previous CCSD(T) references reveals systematic trends, with DMC predicting stronger binding than CCSD(T) for electrostatic-dominated systems, while the binding becomes weaker for dispersion-dominated systems. We show that the relative strength of this discrepancy is correlated to the ratio of electrostatic and dispersion interactions, as obtained from energy decomposition analysis methods. Finally, we have pinpointed model systems: the hydrogen-bonded acetic acid dimer (ID 20) and dispersion-dominated uracil-cyclopentane dimer (ID 42), where these discrepancies are particularly prominent. These systems offer cost-effective benchmarks to guide future developments in DMC, CCSD(T), as well as the wider electronic structure theory community.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of Chemical Physics
Published
2025-04-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0254021
Citations
8
Primary Topic
Advanced Chemical Physics Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
9.97

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Systematic discrepancies between reference methods for noncovalent interactions within the S66 dataset

Dario Alfè, Yasmine S. Al-Hamdani, Benjamin X. Shi, Andrea Zen et al.
8 citations
The Journal of Chemical Physics
Advanced Chemical Physics Studies
9.97
article

Systematic discrepancies between reference methods for noncovalent interactions within the S66 dataset

Dario Alfè, Yasmine S. Al-Hamdani, Benjamin X. Shi, Andrea Zen, Angelos Michaelides, Flaviano Della Pia
article en
8 citations

Abstract

The accurate treatment of noncovalent interactions is necessary to model a wide range of applications, from molecular crystals to surface catalysts to aqueous solutions and many more. Quantum diffusion Monte Carlo (DMC) and coupled cluster theory with single, double, and perturbative triple excitations [CCSD(T)] are considered two widely trusted methods for treating noncovalent interactions. However, while they have been well-validated for small molecules, recent work has indicated that these two methods can disagree by more than 7.5 kcal/mol for larger systems. The origin of this discrepancy remains unknown. Moreover, the lack of systematic comparisons, particularly for medium-sized complexes, has made it difficult to identify which systems may be prone to such disagreements and the potential scale of these differences. In this work, we leverage the latest developments in DMC to compute interaction energies for the entire S66 dataset, containing 66 medium-sized complexes with a balanced representation of dispersion and electrostatic interactions. Comparison to previous CCSD(T) references reveals systematic trends, with DMC predicting stronger binding than CCSD(T) for electrostatic-dominated systems, while the binding becomes weaker for dispersion-dominated systems. We show that the relative strength of this discrepancy is correlated to the ratio of electrostatic and dispersion interactions, as obtained from energy decomposition analysis methods. Finally, we have pinpointed model systems: the hydrogen-bonded acetic acid dimer (ID 20) and dispersion-dominated uracil-cyclopentane dimer (ID 42), where these discrepancies are particularly prominent. These systems offer cost-effective benchmarks to guide future developments in DMC, CCSD(T), as well as the wider electronic structure theory community.

The Journal of Chemical PhysicsVol. 162(14)
University of Cambridge (GB), London Centre for Nanotechnology (GB), Thomas Young Centre (GB), University College London (GB), University of Naples Federico II (IT)
Leverhulme Trust, HORIZON EUROPE European Research Council
Affordable and clean energy
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Advanced Chemical Physics Studies
9.97
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.