We report a systematic comparison of the dispersion and repulsion contributions to the free energy of solvation determined using quantum mechanical self-consistent reaction field (QM-SCRF) and classical methods. In particular, QM-SCRF computations have been performed using the dispersion and repulsion expressions developed in the framework of the integral equation formalism of the polarizable continuum model, whereas classical methods involve both empirical pairwise potential and surface-dependent approaches. Calculations have been performed for a series of aliphatic and aromatic compounds containing prototypical functional groups in four solvents: water, octanol, chloroform, and carbon tetrachloride. The analysis is focused on the dependence of the dispersion and repulsion components on the level of theory used in QM- SCRF computations, the contribution of those terms in different solvents, and the magnitude of the coupling between electrostatic and dispersion–repulsion components. Finally, comparison is made between the disper- sion–repulsion contributions obtained from QM-SCRF calculations and the results determined from classical approaches.

Dispersion and Repulsion Contributions to the Solvation Free Energy: Comparison of Quantum Mechanical and Classical Approaches in the Polarizable Continuum Model

MENNUCCI, BENEDETTA;TOMASI, IACOPO
2006

Abstract

We report a systematic comparison of the dispersion and repulsion contributions to the free energy of solvation determined using quantum mechanical self-consistent reaction field (QM-SCRF) and classical methods. In particular, QM-SCRF computations have been performed using the dispersion and repulsion expressions developed in the framework of the integral equation formalism of the polarizable continuum model, whereas classical methods involve both empirical pairwise potential and surface-dependent approaches. Calculations have been performed for a series of aliphatic and aromatic compounds containing prototypical functional groups in four solvents: water, octanol, chloroform, and carbon tetrachloride. The analysis is focused on the dependence of the dispersion and repulsion components on the level of theory used in QM- SCRF computations, the contribution of those terms in different solvents, and the magnitude of the coupling between electrostatic and dispersion–repulsion components. Finally, comparison is made between the disper- sion–repulsion contributions obtained from QM-SCRF calculations and the results determined from classical approaches.
C., Curutchet; M., Orozco; J., Luque; Mennucci, Benedetta; Tomasi, Iacopo
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11568/206279
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact