Mixed quantum-classical Liouville molecular dynamics without momentum jump

Journal of Chemical Physics

Volumn 118, Issue 23, 2003, Pages 10399-10406

  Ando, Koji ^a   Santer, Mark ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; ELECTRON TRANSITIONS; ELECTRONIC STRUCTURE; HAMILTONIANS; INTEGRODIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS; MATHEMATICAL OPERATORS; MATHEMATICAL TRANSFORMATIONS; QUANTUM THEORY;

HELLMAN-FEYNMANN FORCES; MIXED QUANTUM CLASSICAL LIOUVILLE MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; MOMENTUM JUMP; SPIN BOSON MODELS; WIGNER TRANSFORMATION;

MOLECULAR DYNAMICS;

EID: 0038543035     PISSN: 00219606     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1063/1.1574015     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Classical and Quantum Dynamics in Condensed Phase Simulations, edited by B. J. Berne, G. Ciccotti, and D. Coker (World Scientific, Singapore, 1998).
2. J. C. Tully in Classical and Quantum Dynamics in Condensed Phase Simulations, Chap. 21.
3. O. V. Prezhdo and P. J. Rossky, J. Chem. Phys. 107, 5863 (1997).
4. K. F. Wong and P. J. Rossky, J. Chem. Phys. 116, 8418 (2002).
5. S. Mukamel, Principles of Nonlinear Optical Spectroscopy (Oxford University Press, New York, 1995).
6. Y. Tanimura and S. Mukamel, J. Chem. Phys. 101, 3049 (1994).
7. C. C. Martens and J. Y. Fang, J. Chem. Phys. 106, 4918 (1997).
8. R. Kapral and G. Ciccotti, J. Chem. Phys. 110, 8919 (1999).
9. M. Santer, U. Manthe, and G. Stock, J. Chem. Phys. 114, 2001 (2001).
10. I. Horenko, B. Schmidt, and C. Schütte, J. Chem. Phys. 115, 5733 (2001).
11. C. C. Wan and J. Schofield, J. Chem. Phys. 116, 494 (2002).
12. T. Helgaker, P. Jørgensen, and J. Olsen, Molecular Electronic-Structure Theory (Wiley, Chichester, 2000).
13. R. G. Parr and W. Yang, Density Functional Theory of Atoms and Molecules (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1989).
14. T. Nakajima, T. Tsuneda, H. Nakano, and K. Hirao, J. Theor. Comp. Chem. 1, 109 (2002).
15. D. Marx and J. Hutter, in Modern Methods and Algorithms of Quantum Chemistry, edited by J. Grotendorst (John von Neumann Institute, Jülich, 2000).
16. J. Gao, Rev. Comput. Chem. 7, 119 (1996).
17. S. Nielsen, R. Kapral, and G. Ciccotti, J. Chem. Phys. 112, 6543 (2000).
18. D. M. Kernan, G. Ciccotti, and R. Kapral, J. Chem. Phys. 116, 2346 (2002).
19. K. Ando, Chem. Phys. Lett. 360, 240 (2002).
20. We maintain the appearance of one coordinate for each part just for notational simplicity. An extension to many degrees of freedom is obviously straightforward.
21. We note that extension to the mixed state representation of vibronic manifold is straightforward, which is however not quite relevant here as we will consider the classical (Wigner) limit of the nuclear motions.
22. K. Imre, E. Özizmir, M. Rosenbaum, and P. F. Zweifel, J. Math. Phys. 8, 1097 (1967).
23. J. Maddox, Nature (London) 373, 469 (1995).
24. I. V. Aleksandrov, Z. Naturforsch. 36A, 902 (1981).
25. W. Boucher and J. Traschen, Phys. Rev. D 37, 3522 (1988).
26. A. Anderson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 621 (1995).
27. O. V. Prezhdo and V. V. Kisil, Phys. Rev. A 56, 162 (1997).
28. I. Horenko, C. Salzmann, B. Schmidt, and C. Schütte, J. Chem. Phys. 117, 11075 (2002).
29. ad(t) from the same calculations is correctly compared.
30. K. Ando, J. Chem. Phys. 106, 116 (1997).
31. K. Ando and H. Sumi, J. Phys. Chem. B 102, 10991 (1998).