loos/CCvsMBPT
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

small modification to highlight Rishi work

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Pierre-Francois Loos 2022-10-12 16:08:49 +02:00
parent 2e67a03092
commit 0f3c29f8f4
1 changed files with 2 additions and 2 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

4
CCvsMBPT.tex
View File

@ -286,7 +286,7 @@ and matches the rCCD correlation energy
because $\Tr(\bOm{}{} - \bA{}{}) = \Tr(\bR{}{} - \bA{}{}) = \Tr(\bB{}{} \cdot \bT{}{})$, as evidenced by Eq.~\eqref{eq:RPA_1}.
Note that, in the case of RPAx, the same expression as Eq.~\eqref{eq:EcRPAx} can be derived from the adiabatic connection fluctuation dissipation theorem \cite{Furche_2005} (ACFDT) when exchange is included in the interaction kernel. \cite{Angyan_2011}
This simple and elegant proof was subsequently extended to excitation energies by Berkelbach, \cite{Berkelbach_2018} who showed that similitudes between equation-of-motion (EOM) rCCD (EOM-rCCD) \cite{Stanton_1993} and RPAx exist when the EOM space is restricted to the 1h1p configurations and only the two-body terms are dressed by rCCD correlation.
This simple and elegant proof was subsequently extended to excitation energies by Berkelbach, \cite{Berkelbach_2018} who showed that similitudes between equation-of-motion (EOM) rCCD (EOM-rCCD) \cite{Stanton_1993} and RPAx exist when the EOM space is restricted to the 1h1p configurations and only the two-body terms are dressed by rCCD correlation (see also Ref.~\onlinecite{Rishi_2020}).
To be more specific, restricting ourselves to CCD, \ie, $\hT = \hT_2$, the elements of the 1h1p block of the EOM Hamiltonian read \cite{Stanton_1993}
\begin{equation}
@ -625,7 +625,7 @@ The conventional and CC-based versions of the BSE and $GW$ schemes that we have
Similitudes between BSE@$GW$ and STEOM-CC have been also highlighted, and may explain the reliability of BSE@$GW$ for the computation of optical excitations in molecular systems.
We hope that the present work may provide a consistent approach for the computation of ground- and excited-state properties (such as nuclear gradients) within the $GW$ \cite{Lazzeri_2008,Faber_2011b,Yin_2013,Montserrat_2016,Zhenglu_2019} and BSE \cite{IsmailBeigi_2003,Caylak_2021,Knysh_2022} frameworks, hence broadening the applicability of these formalisms in computational photochemistry.
However, several challenges lie ahead as one must derive, for example, the associated $\Lambda$ equations \cite{Bartlett_1986} and the response of the static screening with respect to the external perturbation at the BSE level.
However, several challenges lie ahead as one must derive, for example, the associated $\Lambda$ equations \cite{Bartlett_1986,Rishi_2020} and the response of the static screening with respect to the external perturbation at the BSE level.
The present connections between CC and $GW$ could also provide new directions for the development of multireference $GW$ methods \cite{Brouder_2009,Linner_2019} in order to treat strongly correlated systems. \cite{Lyakh_2012,Evangelista_2018}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%