From: Noel O'B. <bao...@gm...> - 2007-02-22 16:55:52
|
On 22/02/07, Adam Tenderholt <a-t...@st...> wrote: > > It's probably not possible to standardise the pseudopotential used > > across all programs, but I think that we can at least use the same > > molecule. Adam has already uploaded MoOCl4 for Gaussian, and Mo for > > ADF. I'd prefer to go with MoOCl4 in general as it has at least 1 atom > > with no pseudopotential, and at least 2 atoms with different > > coreelectrons. I don't know if there's any need to recreate another > > one for ADF, although it might be a good idea. > > I actually just ran MoOCl4 for my research using ADF. It's using a > triple zeta with polarization, so if that's ok with you, I can upload > those files today. If not, I can rerun them with a smaller basis set > if you want. Well, that'd be great. Could you leave out the population analysis section to keep things small. > > I note that the Gaussian file is LanL2 for Mo and Cl, and the ADF file > > seems to magically have a frozen core (can you confirm this Adam, as > > there doesn't seem to be any keywords for frozen core in the input > > file?). I'm going to try to create something similar for GAMESS. BTW, > > I don't think there's any need for the overlap matrix and > > coefficients...I think we are testing these sufficiently already. > > Without turning on relativistic effects, ADF only has basis functions > with a frozen core for Mo, although I don't know if it chose the > basis set with the 3d or 4p in the core. Also, I should point out in > case you aren't aware: ADF doesn't use gaussian-type orbitals, but > rather Slater-type orbitals. OK, just to check. > Adam > > |