What types of chemical problems benefit from density-corrected DFT? A probe using an extensive and chemically diverse test suite

TL;DR

This study evaluates the performance of density-corrected DFT versus self-consistent DFT across a diverse benchmark, revealing where density correction improves accuracy, especially for dynamical correlation, and identifying optimal HF exchange percentages.

Contribution

It provides an extensive analysis of density-corrected DFT on the GMTKN55 benchmark, highlighting the effects of HF exchange and identifying optimal parameters for different functionals.

Findings

HF-DFT benefits noncovalent interaction subsets at low HF exchange.

Static correlation subsets may be harmed by HF-DFT.

Optimal HF exchange percentages vary among functionals, around 25-37.5%.

Abstract

For the large and chemically diverse GMTKN55 benchmark suite, we have studied the performance of density-corrected density functional theory (HF-DFT), compared to self-consistent DFT, for several pure and hybrid GGA and meta-GGA exchange-correlation (XC) functionals (PBE, BLYP, TPSS, SCAN) as a function of the percentage of HF exchange in the hybrid. The D4 empirical dispersion correction has been added throughout. For subsets dominated by dynamical correlation -- particularly noncovalent interaction subsets -- HF-DFT is highly beneficial, particularly at low HF exchange percentages. For subsets with significant static correlation (i.e., where a Hartree-Fock determinant is not a good zero-order wavefunction), HF-DFT may do more harm than good. While the self-consistent series show optima at or near 37.5% (i.e., 3/8) for all four XC functionals -- consistent with Grimme's proposal of the PBE38 functional -- HF-BnLYP-D4, HF-PBEn-D4, and HF-TPSSn-D4 all exhibit minima nearer 25% (i.e., 1/4). Intriguingly, for HF-SCANn-D4, the minimum is near 10%, but the weighted mean absolute error (WTMAD2) for GMTKN55 is only barely lower than that of HF-SCAN-D4 (i.e., where the post-HF step is a pure meta-GGA). The latter becomes an attractive option, only slightly more costly than pure Hartree-Fock, and devoid of adjustable parameters other than the three in the dispersion correction. Moreover, its WTMAD2 is only surpassed by the highly empirical M06-2X and by the combinatorically optimized empirical range-separated hybrids wB97X-V and wB97M-V.