TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparing the Expense and Accuracy of Methods to Simulate Atomic Vibrations in Rubrene
AU - Dettmann, Makena A.
AU - Cavalcante, Lucas S.R.
AU - Magdaleno, Corina
AU - Masalkovaitė, Karina
AU - Vong, Daniel
AU - Dull, Jordan T.
AU - Rand, Barry P.
AU - Daemen, Luke L.
AU - Goldman, Nir
AU - Faller, Roland
AU - Moulé, Adam J.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 American Chemical Society.
PY - 2021/12/14
Y1 - 2021/12/14
N2 - Atomic vibrations can inform about materials properties from hole transport in organic semiconductors to correlated disorder in metal-organic frameworks. Currently, there are several methods for predicting these vibrations using simulations, but the accuracy-efficiency tradeoffs have not been examined in depth. In this study, rubrene is used as a model system to predict atomic vibrational properties using six different simulation methods: density functional theory, density functional tight binding, density functional tight binding with a Chebyshev polynomial-based correction, a trained machine learning model, a pretrained machine learning model called ANI-1, and a classical forcefield model. The accuracy of each method is evaluated by comparison to the experimental inelastic neutron scattering spectrum. All methods discussed here show some accuracy across a wide energy region, though the Chebyshev-corrected tight-binding method showed the optimal combination of high accuracy with low expense. We then offer broad simulation guidelines to yield efficient, accurate results for inelastic neutron scattering spectrum prediction.
AB - Atomic vibrations can inform about materials properties from hole transport in organic semiconductors to correlated disorder in metal-organic frameworks. Currently, there are several methods for predicting these vibrations using simulations, but the accuracy-efficiency tradeoffs have not been examined in depth. In this study, rubrene is used as a model system to predict atomic vibrational properties using six different simulation methods: density functional theory, density functional tight binding, density functional tight binding with a Chebyshev polynomial-based correction, a trained machine learning model, a pretrained machine learning model called ANI-1, and a classical forcefield model. The accuracy of each method is evaluated by comparison to the experimental inelastic neutron scattering spectrum. All methods discussed here show some accuracy across a wide energy region, though the Chebyshev-corrected tight-binding method showed the optimal combination of high accuracy with low expense. We then offer broad simulation guidelines to yield efficient, accurate results for inelastic neutron scattering spectrum prediction.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85120536022&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85120536022&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00747
DO - 10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00747
M3 - Article
C2 - 34818006
AN - SCOPUS:85120536022
SN - 1549-9618
VL - 17
SP - 7313
EP - 7320
JO - Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
JF - Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
IS - 12
ER -