Manu: done (so far) with the computational details
This commit is contained in:
parent
80bc17a9da
commit
6f82d5aa02
@ -342,11 +342,21 @@ equals the exact ensemble one
|
||||
n^{\bw}(\br)=\sum_{I=0}^{\nEns-1}
|
||||
\ew{I}n_{\Psi_I}(\br).
|
||||
\eeq
|
||||
The minimizing density-functional KS
|
||||
wavefunctions $\left\{\Det{I}{\bw}\left[n^{\bw}\right]\right\}_{0\leq
|
||||
I\leq M-1}$ are constructed from (weight-dependent) KS orbitals
|
||||
In practice, the minimizing KS density matrix operator
|
||||
$\hgam{\bw}\left[\n{}{\bw}\right]$
|
||||
can be determined from the following KS reformulation of the
|
||||
GOK variational principle, \cite{Gross_1988b,Senjean_2015}
|
||||
\beq\label{eq:min_KS_DM}
|
||||
\E{}{\bw} = \min_{\hGam{\bw}} \left\{\Tr[\hGam{\bw}
|
||||
\left(\hT+\hVne\right)]+\E{\Ha}{}[\n{\hGam{\bw}}{}]+\E{\xc}{\bw}[\n{\hGam{\bw}}{}]\right\},
|
||||
\eeq
|
||||
where $\n{\hGam{\bw}}{}(\br)=\sum_{I=0}^{\nEns - 1}
|
||||
\ew{I}\n{\overline{\Psi}^{(I)}}{}$ is the trial ensemble density. As a
|
||||
result, the orbitals
|
||||
$\lbrace \MO{p}{\bw}(\br{}) \rbrace_{1 \le p \le
|
||||
\nOrb}$. The latters are determined by solving the ensemble KS equation
|
||||
\nOrb}$ from which the KS
|
||||
wavefunctions $\left\{\Det{I}{\bw}\left[n^{\bw}\right]\right\}_{0\leq
|
||||
I\leq M-1}$ are constructed can be obtained by solving the following ensemble KS equation
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
\label{eq:eKS}
|
||||
\qty{ \hHc(\br{}) + \fdv{\E{\Hxc}{\bw}[\n{}{\bw}]}{\n{}{}(\br{})}} \MO{p}{\bw}(\br{}) = \eps{p}{\bw} \MO{p}{\bw}(\br{}),
|
||||
@ -491,8 +501,19 @@ This study deals only with spin-unpolarised systems, \ie, $\n{\uparrow}{} = \n{\
|
||||
Moreover, we restrict our study to the case of a two-state ensemble (\ie, $\nEns = 2$) where both the ground state ($I=0$ with weight $1 - \ew{}$) and the first doubly-excited state ($I=1$ with weight $\ew{}$) are considered.
|
||||
Although one should have $0 \le \ew{} \le 1/2$ to ensure the GOK variational principle, we will sometimes ``violate'' this variational constraint.
|
||||
Indeed, the limit $\ew{} = 1$ is of particular interest as it corresponds to a genuine saddle point of the KS equations, and match perfectly the results obtained with the maximum overlap method (MOM) developed by Gilbert, Gill and coworkers. \cite{Gilbert_2008,Barca_2018a,Barca_2018b}
|
||||
\manu{Maybe we should be more clear about what we mean with $\ew{} = 1$.
|
||||
In the range $1/2\leq \ew{}\leq 1$, }
|
||||
\manu{I think we need to be a bit more clear about the $\ew{} = 1$ case, as
|
||||
it stands a little bit beyond the theory discussed previously. What you
|
||||
are looking at in the range $1/2\leq \ew{}\leq 1$ are, indeed, other
|
||||
stationary points (than the minimizing ones) of the density matrix
|
||||
operator functional in Eq.~(\ref{eq:min_KS_DM}). I would say that we
|
||||
look at these solutions for analysis purposes. I personally never looked
|
||||
(formally) at these solutions and their physical meaning. One should clearly
|
||||
mention that applying GOK-DFT in this range of weights would simply
|
||||
consists in switching ground and first excited states if a true
|
||||
minimization of the ensemble energy were performed. From this point of
|
||||
view we do not violate anything.
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||
\section{Results}
|
||||
\label{sec:res}
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user