morning modifications to MP critical points
This commit is contained in:
parent
1e6af9c215
commit
e00792f2a2
@ -1238,7 +1238,7 @@ eigenstates as a function of $\lambda$ indicate the presence of a zero-temperatu
|
|||||||
Meanwhile, as an avoided crossing becomes increasingly sharp, the corresponding EPs move increasingly close to the real axis, eventually forming a critical point.
|
Meanwhile, as an avoided crossing becomes increasingly sharp, the corresponding EPs move increasingly close to the real axis, eventually forming a critical point.
|
||||||
The existence of an EP \emph{on} the real axis is therefore diagnostic of a QPT.\cite{Cejnar_2005, Cejnar_2007a}
|
The existence of an EP \emph{on} the real axis is therefore diagnostic of a QPT.\cite{Cejnar_2005, Cejnar_2007a}
|
||||||
Since the MP critical point corresponds to a singularity on the real $\lambda$ axis, it can immediately be
|
Since the MP critical point corresponds to a singularity on the real $\lambda$ axis, it can immediately be
|
||||||
recognised as a QPT within the perturbation theory approximation.
|
recognised as a QPT \hugh{with respect to varying the perturbation parameter $\lambda$}.
|
||||||
However, a conventional QPT can only occur in the thermodynamic limit, which here is analogous to the complete
|
However, a conventional QPT can only occur in the thermodynamic limit, which here is analogous to the complete
|
||||||
basis set limit.\cite{Kais_2006}
|
basis set limit.\cite{Kais_2006}
|
||||||
The MP critical point and corresponding $\beta$ singularities in a finite basis must therefore be modelled by pairs of EPs
|
The MP critical point and corresponding $\beta$ singularities in a finite basis must therefore be modelled by pairs of EPs
|
||||||
@ -1270,11 +1270,11 @@ states which share the symmetry of the ground state,\cite{Goodson_2004} and are
|
|||||||
\subcaption{\label{subfig:rmp_ep_to_cp}}
|
\subcaption{\label{subfig:rmp_ep_to_cp}}
|
||||||
\end{subfigure}
|
\end{subfigure}
|
||||||
\caption{%
|
\caption{%
|
||||||
Modelling the RMP critical point using the asymmetric Hubbard dimer.
|
RMP critical point using the asymmetric Hubbard dimer with $\epsilon = 2.5 U$.
|
||||||
(\subref{subfig:rmp_cp}) Exact critical points with $t=0$ occur on the negative real $\lambda$ axis (dashed).
|
(\subref{subfig:rmp_cp}) Exact critical points with $t=0$ occur on the negative real $\lambda$ axis (dashed).
|
||||||
(\subref{subfig:rmp_cp_surf}) Modelling a finite basis using $t=0.1$ yields complex-conjugate EPs close to the
|
(\subref{subfig:rmp_cp_surf}) Modelling a finite basis using $t=0.1$ yields complex-conjugate EPs close to the
|
||||||
real axis, giving a sharp avoided crossing on the real axis (solid).
|
real axis, giving a sharp avoided crossing on the real axis (solid).
|
||||||
\titou{vertical axe label wrong in b.}
|
(\subref{subfig:rmp_ep_to_cp}) Convergence of the ground-state EP onto the real axis in the exact limit $t \rightarrow 0$.
|
||||||
\label{fig:RMP_cp}}
|
\label{fig:RMP_cp}}
|
||||||
\end{figure*}
|
\end{figure*}
|
||||||
%------------------------------------------------------------------%
|
%------------------------------------------------------------------%
|
||||||
@ -1284,19 +1284,20 @@ The simplified site basis of the Hubbard dimer makes explicilty modelling the io
|
|||||||
Instead, we can use an asymmetric version of the Hubbard dimer \cite{Carrascal_2015,Carrascal_2018}
|
Instead, we can use an asymmetric version of the Hubbard dimer \cite{Carrascal_2015,Carrascal_2018}
|
||||||
where we consider one of the sites as a ``ghost atom'' that acts as a
|
where we consider one of the sites as a ``ghost atom'' that acts as a
|
||||||
destination for ionised electrons being originally localised on the other site.
|
destination for ionised electrons being originally localised on the other site.
|
||||||
To mathematically model this scenario, in this asymmetric Hubbard dimer, we introduce a one-electron potential $-\epsilon$ on the left site to
|
To mathematically model this scenario in this asymmetric Hubbard dimer, we introduce a one-electron potential $-\epsilon$ on the left site to
|
||||||
represent the attraction between the electrons and the model ``atomic'' nucleus [see Eq.~\eqref{eq:H_FCI}], where we define $\epsilon > 0$.
|
represent the attraction between the electrons and the model ``atomic'' nucleus [see Eq.~\eqref{eq:H_FCI}], where we define $\epsilon > 0$.
|
||||||
The reference Slater determinant for a doubly-occupied atom can be represented using the RHF
|
The reference Slater determinant for a doubly-occupied atom can be represented using the RHF
|
||||||
orbitals [see Eq.~\eqref{eq:RHF_orbs}] with $\theta_{\alpha}^{\text{RHF}} = \theta_{\beta}^{\text{RHF}} = 0$, which corresponds to strictly localise the two electrons on the left site.
|
orbitals [see Eq.~\eqref{eq:RHF_orbs}] with $\theta_{\alpha}^{\text{RHF}} = \theta_{\beta}^{\text{RHF}} = 0$,
|
||||||
|
which corresponds to strictly localising the two electrons on the left site.
|
||||||
%and energy
|
%and energy
|
||||||
%\begin{equation}
|
%\begin{equation}
|
||||||
% E_\text{HF}(0, 0) = \frac{1}{2} (2 U - 4 \epsilon).
|
% E_\text{HF}(0, 0) = \frac{1}{2} (2 U - 4 \epsilon).
|
||||||
%\end{equation}
|
%\end{equation}
|
||||||
With this representation, the parametrised \hugh{atomic} RMP Hamiltonian becomes
|
With this representation, the parametrised \hugh{asymmetric} RMP Hamiltonian becomes
|
||||||
\begin{widetext}
|
\begin{widetext}
|
||||||
\begin{equation}
|
\begin{equation}
|
||||||
\label{eq:H_RMP}
|
\label{eq:H_RMP}
|
||||||
\hugh{\bH_\text{atom}\qty(\lambda)} =
|
\hugh{\bH_\text{asym}\qty(\lambda)} =
|
||||||
\begin{pmatrix}
|
\begin{pmatrix}
|
||||||
2(U-\epsilon) - \lambda U & -\lambda t & -\lambda t & 0 \\
|
2(U-\epsilon) - \lambda U & -\lambda t & -\lambda t & 0 \\
|
||||||
-\lambda t & (U-\epsilon) - \lambda U & 0 & -\lambda t \\
|
-\lambda t & (U-\epsilon) - \lambda U & 0 & -\lambda t \\
|
||||||
@ -1338,7 +1339,7 @@ Molecules containing these atoms are therefore often class $\beta$ systems with
|
|||||||
a divergent RMP series due to the MP critical point. \cite{Goodson_2004,Sergeev_2006}
|
a divergent RMP series due to the MP critical point. \cite{Goodson_2004,Sergeev_2006}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
% EXACT VERSUS APPROXIMATE
|
% EXACT VERSUS APPROXIMATE
|
||||||
The critical point in the exact case $t=0$ lies on the \titou{negative} real $\lambda$ axis (Fig.~\ref{subfig:rmp_cp}: dashed lines),
|
The critical point in the exact case $t=0$ lies on the negative real $\lambda$ axis (Fig.~\ref{subfig:rmp_cp}: dashed lines),
|
||||||
mirroring the behaviour of a quantum phase transition.\cite{Kais_2006}
|
mirroring the behaviour of a quantum phase transition.\cite{Kais_2006}
|
||||||
However, in practical calculations performed with a finite basis set, the critical point is modelled as a cluster
|
However, in practical calculations performed with a finite basis set, the critical point is modelled as a cluster
|
||||||
of branch points close to the real axis.
|
of branch points close to the real axis.
|
||||||
@ -1346,45 +1347,53 @@ The use of a finite basis can be modelled in the asymmetric dimer by making the
|
|||||||
idealised destination for the ionised electrons with a non-zero (yet small) hopping term $t$.
|
idealised destination for the ionised electrons with a non-zero (yet small) hopping term $t$.
|
||||||
Taking the value $t=0.1$ (Fig.~\ref{subfig:rmp_cp}: solid lines), the critical point becomes a
|
Taking the value $t=0.1$ (Fig.~\ref{subfig:rmp_cp}: solid lines), the critical point becomes a
|
||||||
sharp avoided crossing with a complex-conjugate pair of EPs close to the real axis (Fig.~\ref{subfig:rmp_cp_surf}).
|
sharp avoided crossing with a complex-conjugate pair of EPs close to the real axis (Fig.~\ref{subfig:rmp_cp_surf}).
|
||||||
In the limit $t \to 0$, these EPs approach the real axis, mirroring Sergeev's discussion on finite basis
|
In the limit $t \to 0$, these EPs approach the real axis (Fig.~\ref{subfig:rmp_ep_to_cp}),
|
||||||
|
mirroring Sergeev's discussion on finite basis
|
||||||
set representations of the MP critical point.\cite{Sergeev_2006}
|
set representations of the MP critical point.\cite{Sergeev_2006}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
%------------------------------------------------------------------%
|
%------------------------------------------------------------------%
|
||||||
% Figure on the UMP critical point
|
% Figure on the UMP critical point
|
||||||
%------------------------------------------------------------------%
|
%------------------------------------------------------------------%
|
||||||
\begin{figure*}[t]
|
\begin{figure*}[t]
|
||||||
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\textwidth}
|
\begin{subfigure}{0.32\textwidth}
|
||||||
\includegraphics[height=0.65\textwidth,trim={0pt 5pt 0pt 15pt}, clip]{ump_critical_point}
|
\includegraphics[height=0.75\textwidth,trim={0pt 5pt -10pt 15pt},clip]{ump_cp}
|
||||||
\subcaption{\label{subfig:ump_cp}}
|
\subcaption{\label{subfig:ump_cp}}
|
||||||
\end{subfigure}
|
\end{subfigure}
|
||||||
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\textwidth}
|
%
|
||||||
\includegraphics[height=0.65\textwidth]{ump_ep_to_cp}
|
\begin{subfigure}{0.32\textwidth}
|
||||||
\subcaption{\label{subfig:ump_ep_to_cp}}
|
\includegraphics[height=0.75\textwidth]{ump_cp_surf}
|
||||||
\end{subfigure}
|
\subcaption{\label{subfig:ump_cp_surf}}
|
||||||
|
\end{subfigure}
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
\begin{subfigure}{0.32\textwidth}
|
||||||
|
\includegraphics[height=0.75\textwidth]{ump_ep_to_cp}
|
||||||
|
\subcaption{\label{subfig:ump_ep_to_cp}}
|
||||||
|
\end{subfigure}
|
||||||
|
% \includegraphics[height=0.65\textwidth,trim={0pt 5pt 0pt 15pt}, clip]{ump_critical_point}
|
||||||
\caption{%
|
\caption{%
|
||||||
The UMP ground-state EP becomes a critical point in the strong correlation limit (large $U/t$).
|
The UMP ground-state EP becomes a critical point in the strong correlation limit (large $U/t$).
|
||||||
(\subref{subfig:ump_cp}) As $U/t$ increases, the avoided crossing on the real $\lambda$ axis
|
(\subref{subfig:ump_cp}) As $U/t$ increases, the avoided crossing on the real $\lambda$ axis
|
||||||
becomes increasingly sharp.
|
becomes increasingly sharp.
|
||||||
(\subref{subfig:ump_ep_to_cp}) The convergence of the EPs at $\lep$ onto the real axis for $U/t \to \infty$
|
(\subref{subfig:ump_cp_surf}) Complex energy surfaces for $U = 5t$.
|
||||||
mirrors the formation of the RMP critical point and other QPTs in the complete basis set limit.
|
(\subref{subfig:ump_ep_to_cp}) Convergence of the EPs at $\lep$ onto the real axis for $U/t \to \infty$.
|
||||||
|
%mirrors the formation of the RMP critical point and other QPTs in the complete basis set limit.
|
||||||
\label{fig:UMP_cp}}
|
\label{fig:UMP_cp}}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\end{figure*}
|
\end{figure*}
|
||||||
%------------------------------------------------------------------%
|
%------------------------------------------------------------------%
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
% RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN QPT AND UMP
|
% RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN QPT AND UMP
|
||||||
\titou{Returning to the symmetric Hubbard dimer?}
|
Returning to the symmetric Hubbard dimer, we showed in Sec.~\ref{sec:spin_cont} that the slow
|
||||||
In Sec.~\ref{sec:spin_cont} we showed that the slow convergence of the UMP series for the strongly correlated
|
convergence of the strongly correlated UMP series
|
||||||
Hubbard dimer was due to a complex-conjugate pair of EPs just outside the radius of convergence.
|
was due to a complex-conjugate pair of EPs just outside the radius of convergence.
|
||||||
These EPs have positive real components and small imaginary components (see Fig.~\ref{fig:UMP}), suggesting a potential
|
These EPs have positive real components and small imaginary components (see Fig.~\ref{fig:UMP}), suggesting a potential
|
||||||
connection to MP critical points and QPTs (see Sec.~\ref{sec:MP_critical_point}).
|
connection to MP critical points and QPTs (see Sec.~\ref{sec:MP_critical_point}).
|
||||||
For $\lambda>1$, the HF potential becomes an attractive component in Stillinger's
|
For $\lambda>1$, the HF potential becomes an attractive component in Stillinger's
|
||||||
Hamiltonian displayed in Eq.~\eqref{eq:HamiltonianStillinger}, while the explicit electron-electron interaction
|
Hamiltonian displayed in Eq.~\eqref{eq:HamiltonianStillinger}, while the explicit electron-electron interaction
|
||||||
becomes increasingly repulsive.
|
becomes increasingly repulsive.
|
||||||
\titou{Critical points along the positive real $\lambda$ axis for closed-shell molecules then represent
|
Closed--shell critical points along the positive real $\lambda$ axis then represent
|
||||||
points where the two-electron repulsion overcomes the attractive HF potential
|
points where the two-electron repulsion overcomes the attractive HF potential
|
||||||
and a single electron dissociates from the molecule.\cite{Sergeev_2006}}
|
and a single electron dissociates from the molecule (see Ref.~\onlinecite{Sergeev_2006})
|
||||||
\titou{T2: I'd like to discuss that with you.}
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
In contrast, symmetry-breaking in the UMP reference creates different HF potentials for the spin-up and spin-down electrons.
|
In contrast, symmetry-breaking in the UMP reference creates different HF potentials for the spin-up and spin-down electrons.
|
||||||
Consider one of the two reference UHF solutions where the spin-up and spin-down electrons are localised on the left and right sites respectively.
|
Consider one of the two reference UHF solutions where the spin-up and spin-down electrons are localised on the left and right sites respectively.
|
||||||
@ -1394,10 +1403,9 @@ As $\lambda$ becomes greater than 1 and the HF potentials become attractive, the
|
|||||||
driving force for the electrons to swap sites.
|
driving force for the electrons to swap sites.
|
||||||
This swapping process can also be represented as a double excitation, and thus an avoided crossing will occur
|
This swapping process can also be represented as a double excitation, and thus an avoided crossing will occur
|
||||||
for $\lambda \geq 1$ (Fig.~\ref{subfig:ump_cp}).
|
for $\lambda \geq 1$ (Fig.~\ref{subfig:ump_cp}).
|
||||||
\titou{Note that, although this appears to be an avoided crossing between the ground and first-excited state,
|
While this appears to be an avoided crossing between the ground and first-excited state,
|
||||||
the earlier excited-state avoided crossing means that the first-excited state qualitatively
|
the presence of an earlier excited-state avoided crossing means that the first-excited state qualitatively
|
||||||
represents the double excitation for $\lambda > 0.5.$}
|
represents the reference double excitation for $\lambda > 0.5.$
|
||||||
\titou{T2: I find it hard to understand. I'd like to discuss this as well.}
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
% SHARPNESS AND QPT
|
% SHARPNESS AND QPT
|
||||||
The ``sharpness'' of the avoided crossing is controlled by the correlation strength $U/t$.
|
The ``sharpness'' of the avoided crossing is controlled by the correlation strength $U/t$.
|
||||||
@ -1407,15 +1415,13 @@ This delocalisation dampens the electron swapping process and leads to a ``shall
|
|||||||
that corresponds to EPs with non-zero imaginary components (solid lines in Fig.~\ref{subfig:ump_cp}).
|
that corresponds to EPs with non-zero imaginary components (solid lines in Fig.~\ref{subfig:ump_cp}).
|
||||||
As $U/t$ becomes larger, the HF potentials become stronger and the on-site repulsion dominates the hopping
|
As $U/t$ becomes larger, the HF potentials become stronger and the on-site repulsion dominates the hopping
|
||||||
term to make electron delocalisation less favourable.
|
term to make electron delocalisation less favourable.
|
||||||
\titou{In other words, the electron localises on each site forming a so-called Wigner crystal.
|
In other words, the electrons localise on individual sites to form a Wigner crystal.
|
||||||
T2: is it worth saying again?}
|
|
||||||
These effects create a stronger driving force for the electrons to swap sites until eventually this swapping
|
These effects create a stronger driving force for the electrons to swap sites until eventually this swapping
|
||||||
occurs exactly at $\lambda = 1$.
|
occurs exactly at $\lambda = 1$.
|
||||||
In this limit, the ground-state EPs approach the real axis (Fig.~\ref{subfig:ump_ep_to_cp}) and the avoided
|
In this limit, the ground-state EPs approach the real axis (Fig.~\ref{subfig:ump_ep_to_cp}) and the avoided
|
||||||
crossing creates a gradient discontinuity in the ground-state energy (dashed lines in Fig.~\ref{subfig:ump_cp}).
|
crossing creates a gradient discontinuity in the ground-state energy (dashed lines in Fig.~\ref{subfig:ump_cp}).
|
||||||
We therefore find that, in the strong correlation limit, the symmetry-broken ground-state EP becomes
|
We therefore find that, in the strong correlation limit, the symmetry-broken ground-state EP becomes
|
||||||
a new type of MP critical point \titou{and represents a QPT in the perturbation approximation}.
|
a new type of MP critical point and \hugh{represents a QPT as the perturbation parameter $\lambda$ is varied.}
|
||||||
\titou{T2: what do you mean by this?}
|
|
||||||
Furthermore, this argument explains why the dominant UMP singularity lies so close, but always outside, the
|
Furthermore, this argument explains why the dominant UMP singularity lies so close, but always outside, the
|
||||||
radius of convergence (see Fig.~\ref{fig:RadConv}).
|
radius of convergence (see Fig.~\ref{fig:RadConv}).
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Binary file not shown.
File diff suppressed because it is too large
Load Diff
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user