Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Overlap matrix for CC-PVDZ does not look correct #1034

Open
xdvriend opened this issue Sep 16, 2022 · 2 comments
Open

Overlap matrix for CC-PVDZ does not look correct #1034

xdvriend opened this issue Sep 16, 2022 · 2 comments
Labels
bug Something isn't working (as expected)

Comments

@xdvriend
Copy link
Contributor

xdvriend commented Sep 16, 2022

Describe the bug
When retrieving the overlap matrix from GQCP in the cc-pvdz basis set, the resulting overlap matrix does not look as expected. It does not have ones on the diagonal.

Other basis sets (STO-3G, 6-31G,...) do not have this issue as far as we know.

To Reproduce
H2 ccpvdz Overlap.txt

Expected behavior
We expect the overlap matrix to look like this (bohr):
Screenshot 2022-09-16 at 17 20 06

Ångstrom looks like this:
Screenshot 2022-09-19 at 11 03 05

@xdvriend xdvriend added the bug Something isn't working (as expected) label Sep 16, 2022
@guacke
Copy link
Contributor

guacke commented Sep 16, 2022

Current tests are only implemented for STO-3G and 6-31G. There is a discrepancy between the cc-pVDZ basis set included in the version of Libint included in the Docker container (see /usr/local/miniconda3/share/libint/2.6.0/basis/cc-pvdz.g94 (which is the same as the one used by Psi4))

H     0 
S   3   1.00
     13.0100000              0.0196850        
      1.9620000              0.1379770        
      0.4446000              0.4781480        
S   1   1.00
      0.1220000              1.0000000        
P   1   1.00
      0.7270000              1.0000000 

and the current EMSL basis set:

H     0 
S   4   1.00
     13.0100000              0.0196850        
      1.9620000              0.1379770        
      0.4446000              0.4781480 
      0.1220000              0.5012400
S   1   1.00
      0.1220000              1.0000000        
P   1   1.00
      0.7270000              1.0000000 

Using the latter basis set leads to ones along the diagonal, but to differing values off-diagonal.

@guacke
Copy link
Contributor

guacke commented Sep 16, 2022

Related to jjgoings/McMurchie-Davidson#1 and theochem/horton#39.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working (as expected)
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants