Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Go Green: Selected Configuration Interaction as a More Sustainable Alternative for High Accuracy

Published 20 Feb 2024 in physics.chem-ph, cond-mat.mtrl-sci, cond-mat.str-el, nucl-th, and physics.comp-ph | (2402.13111v3)

Abstract: Recently, a new distributed implementation of the full configuration interaction (FCI) method has been reported [Gao et al. J. Chem Theory Comput. 2024, 20, 1185]. Thanks to a hybrid parallelization scheme, the authors were able to compute the exact energy of propane (\ce{C3H8}) in the minimal basis STO-3G. This formidable task involves handling an active space of 26 electrons in 23 orbitals or a Hilbert space of \SI{1.3d12} determinants. This is, by far, the largest FCI calculation reported to date. Here, we illustrate how, from a general point of view, selected configuration interaction (SCI) can achieve microhartree accuracy at a fraction of the computational and memory cost, via a sparse exploration of the FCI space. The present SCI calculations are performed with the \textit{Configuration Interaction using a Perturbative Selection made Iteratively} (CIPSI) algorithm, as implemented in a determinant-driven way in the \textsc{quantum package} software. The present study reinforces the common wisdom that among the exponentially large number of determinants in the FCI space, only a tiny fraction of them significantly contribute to the energy. More importantly, it demonstrates the feasibility of achieving comparable accuracy using more reasonable and sustainable computational resources, hence reducing the ever-growing carbon footprint of computational chemistry.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (23)
  1. J. J. Eriksen, J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 12, 418 (2021).
  2. N. Handy, Chem. Phys. Lett. 74, 280 (1980).
  3. P. J. Knowles and N. C. Handy, Chem. Phys. Lett. 111, 315 (1984).
  4. P. J. Knowles and N. C. Handy, Comput. Phys. Commun. 54, 75 (1989a).
  5. P. J. Knowles and N. C. Handy, J. Chem. Phys. 91, 2396 (1989b).
  6. B. S. Fales and B. G. Levine, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 11, 4708 (2015).
  7. C. F. Bender and E. R. Davidson, Phys. Rev. 183, 23 (1969).
  8. J. L. Whitten and M. Hackmeyer, J. Chem. Phys. 51, 5584 (1969).
  9. R. J. Buenker and S. D. Peyerimhoff, Theor. Chim. Acta 35, 33 (1974).
  10. S. R. White, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 2863 (1992).
  11. S. R. White, Phys. Rev. B 48, 10345 (1993).
  12. G. K.-L. Chan and S. Sharma, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 62, 465 (2011).
  13. J. J. Eriksen and J. Gauss, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 14, 5180 (2018).
  14. J. J. Eriksen and J. Gauss, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 15, 4873 (2019a).
  15. J. J. Eriksen and J. Gauss, J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 27, 7910 (2019b).
  16. M. Motta and S. Zhang, WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci. 8, e1364 (2018).
  17. M. Caffarel, T. Applencourt, E. Giner,  and A. Scemama, “Using CIPSI Nodes in Diffusion Monte Carlo,” in Recent Progress in Quantum Monte Carlo (2016) Chap. 2, pp. 15–46.
  18. J. B. Schriber and F. A. Evangelista, J. Chem. Phys. 144, 161106 (2016).
  19. Y. Yao and C. J. Umrigar, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 17, 4183 (2021).
  20. W. Liu and M. Hoffmann, Theor. Chem. Acc. 133, 1481 (2014).
  21. W. Liu and M. R. Hoffmann, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 12, 1169 (2016).
  22. J. P. Coe, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 14, 5739 (2018).
  23. H. G. A. Burton and P.-F. Loos, “Rationale for the extrapolation procedure in selected configuration interaction,”  (2024), arXiv:2312.12530 [physics.chem-ph] .
Citations (1)

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We found no open problems mentioned in this paper.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 4 tweets with 28 likes about this paper.