Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida 32306-4390, United States.
J Phys Chem A. 2023 Jun 22;127(24):5264-5275. doi: 10.1021/acs.jpca.3c01842. Epub 2023 Jun 8.
Cavity quantum electrodynamics (QED) generalizations of time-dependent (TD) density functional theory (DFT) and equation-of-motion (EOM) coupled-cluster (CC) theory are used to model small molecules strongly coupled to optical cavity modes. We consider two types of calculations. In the first approach (termed "relaxed"), we use a coherent-state-transformed Hamiltonian within the ground- and excited-state portions of the calculations, and cavity-induced orbital relaxation effects are included at the mean-field level. This procedure guarantees that the energy is origin-invariant in post-self-consistent-field calculations. In the second approach (termed "unrelaxed"), we ignore the coherent-state transformation and the associated orbital relaxation effects. In this case, ground-state unrelaxed QED-CC calculations pick up a modest origin dependence but otherwise reproduce relaxed QED-CC results within the coherent-state basis. On the other hand, a severe origin dependence manifests in ground-state unrelaxed QED mean-field energies. For excitation energies computed at experimentally realizable coupling strengths, relaxed and unrelaxed QED-EOM-CC results are similar, while significant differences emerge for unrelaxed and relaxed QED-TDDFT. First, QED-EOM-CC and relaxed QED-TDDFT both predict that electronic states that are not resonant with the cavity mode are nonetheless perturbed by the cavity. Unrelaxed QED-TDDFT, on the other hand, fails to capture this effect. Second, in the limit of large coupling strengths, relaxed QED-TDDFT tends to overestimate Rabi splittings, while unrelaxed QED-TDDFT underestimates them, given splittings from relaxed QED-EOM-CC as a reference, and relaxed QED-TDDFT generally does the better job of reproducing the QED-EOM-CC results.
腔量子电动力学 (QED) 对含时 (TD) 密度泛函理论 (DFT) 和运动方程 (EOM) 耦合簇 (CC) 理论的推广被用于模拟与光腔模式强耦合的小分子。我们考虑了两种类型的计算。在第一种方法中(称为“松弛”),我们在计算的基态和激发态部分使用相干态变换哈密顿量,并且在平均场水平上包含腔诱导轨道弛豫效应。该过程保证了自洽场后计算的能量原点不变。在第二种方法中(称为“非松弛”),我们忽略相干态变换和相关的轨道弛豫效应。在这种情况下,基态非松弛 QED-CC 计算会略微依赖于原点,但在相干态基下,其他方面都可以再现松弛 QED-CC 结果。另一方面,基态非松弛 QED 平均场能量表现出严重的原点依赖。对于在实验可实现的耦合强度下计算的激发能,松弛和非松弛 QED-EOM-CC 结果相似,而对于非松弛和松弛 QED-TDDFT 则会出现显著差异。首先,QED-EOM-CC 和松弛 QED-TDDFT 都预测与腔模式不共振的电子态仍会受到腔的影响。另一方面,非松弛 QED-TDDFT 无法捕获此效果。其次,在大耦合强度的极限下,松弛 QED-TDDFT 趋于高估拉比分裂,而非松弛 QED-TDDFT 则低估了它们,因为将松弛 QED-EOM-CC 的分裂作为参考,并且松弛 QED-TDDFT 通常可以更好地再现 QED-EOM-CC 的结果。