Theoretical Predictions of the Vibrational Frequencies of Singlet Li4

  • D. D. Shillady
  • B. K. Rao
  • P. Jena


The geometry of the singlet ground state of Li4, has been optimized using gradient methods in a 6–21G and 6–21G* basis using MICROMOLE and HONDO/5 computer programs respectively. The geometries were exhaustively optimized to provide the best energy minimum point at which to calculate the force constant matrix from a finite gradient difference and thus estimate the vibrational frequencies of the cluster. The lowest energy vibration is estimated as 100 to 106 cm in energy and offers a vibronic mechanism to a quasi-tetrahedral triplet state. The triplet geometry was optimized in an ST0–6G basis and both singlet and triplet geometries were compared in a Van Duijneveldt (10s, 2p/4s, 1p) basis with configuration interaction (C.I.) treatment including valence shell single, double, and selected quadruple excitations. The 99 C.I. singlet energy at the 6–21G geometry is -29.782356 au and the 100 C.I. triplet energy at the ST0–6G geometry is -29.754456 au. Three quadruple excitations contributed only 0.064 ev to the singlet, and split-double (11) excitations were more important than quadruple excitations in the triplet C.I. This study suggests an electronic singlet-triplet transition in Li4 at about 0.8 ev (1550 nm. wavelength) which may couple with a vibrational mode of about 100 cm-1.


Configuration Interaction Singlet Ground State Lobe Basis Force Constant Matrix Lithium Cluster 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    B. K. Rao, S. N. Khanna and P. Jena, Equilibrium Geometries of Small Metal Clusters and Their Relationship to Crystalline Structure, Solid State Commun. 56:731 (1985).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    B. K. Rao, P. Jena and D. D. Shillady, Structural Properties of Microcrystallites, Phys. Rev. 30: 7293 (1984).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    C. C. J. Roothaan, New Developments in Molecular Orbital Theory, Rev. Mod. Phys. 23:69 (1951).ADSCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    S. M. Colwell, A. R. Marshall, R. D. Amos and N. C. Handy, Quantum Chemistry on Microcomputers, Chem. in Britain, p 657, July (1985).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Dupuis, J. Rys and H. F. King, Ab Initio Hartree-Fock Self-Consistent Field Program, Quantum Chemistry Program Exchange No. 403, Indiana University U.S.A.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. F. Boys and G. B. Cook, Mathematical Problems in the Complete Quantum Predictions of Chemical Phenomena, Rev. Mod. Phys. 32:285 (1960).MathSciNetADSCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    D. D. Shillady and S. Baldwin-Boisclair, Dipole-Optimized Gaussian Orbitals for Rapid Computation of Electrostatic Molecular Potential Contour Maps, Int. J. Quantum Chem., Quantum Biology Symposium No. 6, 105 (1979).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Dupuis and H. F. King, Molecular Symmetry II. Gradient of Electronic Energy with Respect to Nuclear Coordinates, J. Chem. Phys. 68:3998 (1978).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. S. Binkley, J. A. Pople and W. J. Hehre, Self-Consistent Molecular Orbital Methods 21. Small Split-Valence Basis Sets for First-Row Elements, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 102:939 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    D. D. Shillady, Ab Initio Gaussian Lobe SCF Closed Shell Program, Quantum Chemistry Program Exchange No. 239, Indiana University, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    F. B. van Duijneveldt, Gaussian Basis Sets for the Atoms H-Ne for use in Molecular Calculations, IBM Publication RJ 945 (No. J6437).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. D. Shillady
    • 1
  • B. K. Rao
    • 1
  • P. Jena
    • 1
  1. 1.Departments of Chemistry and PhysicsVirginia Commonwealth UniversityRichmondUSA

Personalised recommendations