It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
High-throughput computational screening (HTCS) is a powerful approach for the rational and time-efficient design of electroactive compounds. The effectiveness of HTCS is dependent on accuracy and speed at which the performance descriptors can be estimated for possibly millions of candidate compounds. Here, a systematic evaluation of computational methods, including force field (FF), semi-empirical quantum mechanics (SEQM), density functional based tight binding (DFTB), and density functional theory (DFT), is performed on the basis of their accuracy in predicting the redox potentials of redox-active organic compounds. Geometry optimizations at low-level theories followed by single point energy (SPE) DFT calculations that include an implicit solvation model are found to offer equipollent accuracy as the high-level DFT methods, albeit at significantly lower computational costs. Effects of implicit solvation on molecular geometries and SPEs, and their overall effects on the prediction accuracy of redox potentials are analyzed in view of computational cost versus prediction accuracy, which outlines the best choice of methods corresponding to a desired level of accuracy. The modular computational approach is applicable for accelerating the virtual studies on functional quinones and the respective discovery of candidate compounds for energy storage.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 DIFFER—Dutch Institute for Fundamental Energy Research, Eindhoven, The Netherlands (GRID:grid.434188.2) (ISNI:0000 0000 8700 504X); CCER—Center for Computational Energy Research, Eindhoven, The Netherlands (GRID:grid.434188.2); Eindhoven University of Technology, Department of Applied Physics, Eindhoven, The Netherlands (GRID:grid.6852.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 0398 8763)
2 DIFFER—Dutch Institute for Fundamental Energy Research, Eindhoven, The Netherlands (GRID:grid.434188.2) (ISNI:0000 0000 8700 504X); CCER—Center for Computational Energy Research, Eindhoven, The Netherlands (GRID:grid.434188.2)