Exploring Alternate Methods for the Calculation of High-Level Vibrational Corrections of NMR Spin-Spin Coupling Constants

Traditional nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) calculations typically treat systems with a Born-Oppenheimer-derived electronic wave function that is solved for a fixed nuclear geometry. One can numerically account for this neglected nuclear motion by averaging over property values for all nuclear geometries with a vibrational wave function and adding this expectation value as a correction to an equilibrium geometry property value. Presented are benchmark coupled-cluster singles and doubles (CCSD) vibrational corrections to spin-spin coupling constants (SSCCs) computed at the level of vibrational second-order perturbation theory (VPT2) using the vibrational averaging driver of the CFOUR program. As CCSD calculations of vibrational corrections are very costly, cheaper electronic structure methods are explored via a newly developed Python vibrational averaging program within the Dalton Project. Namely, results obtained with the second-order polarization propagator approximation (SOPPA) and density functional theory (DFT) with the B3LYP and PBE0 exchange-correlation functionals are compared to the benchmark CCSD//CCSD(T) and experimental values. CCSD//CCSD(T) corrections are also combined with literature CC3 equilibrium geometry values to form the highest-order vibrationally corrected values available (i.e., CC3//CCSD(T) + CCSD//CCSD(T)). CCSD//CCSD(T) statistics showed favorable statistics in comparison to experimental values, albeit at an unfavorably high computational cost. A cheaper CCSD//CCSD(T) + B3LYP method showed quite similar mean absolute deviation (MAD) values as CCSD//CCSD(T), concluding that CCSD//CCSD(T) + B3LYP is optimal in terms of cost and accuracy. With reference to experimental values, a vibrational correction was not worth the cost for all of the other methods tested. Finally, deviation statistics showed that CC3//CCSD(T) + CCSD//CCSD(T) vibrational-corrected equilibrium values deteriorated in comparison to CCSD//CCSD(T) attributed to the use of a smaller basis set or lack of solvation effects for the CC3 equilibrium calculations.