Merge branch 'master' of https://git.irsamc.ups-tlse.fr/loos/SRGGW
This commit is contained in:
commit
93a3699d1a
@ -80,11 +80,9 @@
|
||||
doi = {10.1021/acs.jctc.9b00353},
|
||||
eprint = {https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.9b00353},
|
||||
journal = {J. Chem. Theory Comput.},
|
||||
note = {PMID: 31268704},
|
||||
number = {8},
|
||||
pages = {4399-4414},
|
||||
title = {Improving the Efficiency of the Multireference Driven Similarity Renormalization Group via Sequential Transformation, Density Fitting, and the Noninteracting Virtual Orbital Approximation},
|
||||
url = {https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.9b00353},
|
||||
volume = {15},
|
||||
year = {2019},
|
||||
bdsk-url-1 = {https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.9b00353}}
|
||||
@ -99,7 +97,6 @@
|
||||
number = {11},
|
||||
pages = {114111},
|
||||
title = {Spin-free formulation of the multireference driven similarity renormalization group: A benchmark study of first-row diatomic molecules and spin-crossover energetics},
|
||||
url = {https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0059362},
|
||||
volume = {155},
|
||||
year = {2021},
|
||||
bdsk-url-1 = {https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0059362}}
|
||||
@ -111,11 +108,9 @@
|
||||
doi = {10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00980},
|
||||
eprint = {https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00980},
|
||||
journal = {J. Chem. Theory Comput.},
|
||||
note = {PMID: 34839660},
|
||||
number = {12},
|
||||
pages = {7666-7681},
|
||||
title = {Analytic Energy Gradients for the Driven Similarity Renormalization Group Multireference Second-Order Perturbation Theory},
|
||||
url = {https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00980},
|
||||
volume = {17},
|
||||
year = {2021},
|
||||
bdsk-url-1 = {https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00980}}
|
||||
@ -127,11 +122,9 @@
|
||||
doi = {10.1021/acs.jctc.2c00966},
|
||||
eprint = {https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.2c00966},
|
||||
journal = {J. Chem. Theory Comput.},
|
||||
note = {PMID: 36534617},
|
||||
number = {1},
|
||||
pages = {122-136},
|
||||
title = {Assessment of State-Averaged Driven Similarity Renormalization Group on Vertical Excitation Energies: Optimal Flow Parameters and Applications to Nucleobases},
|
||||
url = {https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.2c00966},
|
||||
volume = {19},
|
||||
year = {2023},
|
||||
bdsk-url-1 = {https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.2c00966}}
|
||||
@ -175,11 +168,9 @@
|
||||
doi = {10.1021/acs.jctc.7b00586},
|
||||
eprint = {https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.7b00586},
|
||||
journal = {J. Chem. Theory Comput.},
|
||||
note = {PMID: 28873298},
|
||||
number = {10},
|
||||
pages = {4765-4778},
|
||||
title = {GW Vertex Corrected Calculations for Molecular Systems},
|
||||
url = {https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.7b00586},
|
||||
volume = {13},
|
||||
year = {2017},
|
||||
bdsk-url-1 = {https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.7b00586}}
|
||||
@ -397,11 +388,9 @@
|
||||
doi = {10.1021/acs.jctc.2c00617},
|
||||
eprint = {https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.2c00617},
|
||||
journal = {J. Chem. Theory Comput.},
|
||||
note = {PMID: 36322136},
|
||||
number = {12},
|
||||
pages = {7570-7585},
|
||||
title = {Benchmark of GW Methods for Core-Level Binding Energies},
|
||||
url = {https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.2c00617},
|
||||
volume = {18},
|
||||
year = {2022},
|
||||
bdsk-url-1 = {https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.2c00617}}
|
||||
@ -1474,7 +1463,7 @@
|
||||
author = {Olsen, Jeppe and J{\o}rgensen, Poul and Helgaker, Trygve and Christiansen, Ove},
|
||||
doi = {10.1063/1.481611},
|
||||
issn = {0021-9606},
|
||||
journal = {The Journal of Chemical Physics},
|
||||
journal = {J. Chem. Phys.},
|
||||
number = {22},
|
||||
pages = {9736--9748},
|
||||
title = {Divergence in {{M\o ller}}\textendash{{Plesset}} Theory: {{A}} Simple Explanation Based on a Two-State Model},
|
||||
@ -1487,7 +1476,7 @@
|
||||
copyright = {\textcopyright{} 2001 American Institute of Physics.},
|
||||
doi = {10.1063/1.1345510},
|
||||
issn = {0021-9606},
|
||||
journal = {The Journal of Chemical Physics},
|
||||
journal = {J. Chem. Phys.},
|
||||
number = {9},
|
||||
pages = {3913},
|
||||
title = {Identifying and Removing Intruder States in Multireference {{Mo}}/Ller\textendash{{Plesset}} Perturbation Theory},
|
||||
@ -1499,7 +1488,7 @@
|
||||
author = {Battaglia, Stefano and Frans{\'e}n, Lina and Fdez. Galv{\'a}n, Ignacio and Lindh, Roland},
|
||||
doi = {10.1021/acs.jctc.2c00368},
|
||||
issn = {1549-9618},
|
||||
journal = {Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation},
|
||||
journal = {J. Chem. Theory Comput.},
|
||||
number = {8},
|
||||
pages = {4814--4825},
|
||||
title = {Regularized {{CASPT2}}: An {{Intruder-State-Free Approach}}},
|
||||
@ -6637,7 +6626,7 @@
|
||||
author = {Strinati, G. and Mattausch, H. J. and Hanke, W.},
|
||||
date-modified = {2023-01-20 09:26:16 +0100},
|
||||
doi = {10.1103/PhysRevB.25.2867},
|
||||
journal = {Physical Review B},
|
||||
journal = {Phys. Rev. B},
|
||||
number = {4},
|
||||
pages = {2867--2888},
|
||||
title = {Dynamical Aspects of Correlation Corrections in a Covalent Crystal},
|
||||
@ -14957,7 +14946,7 @@
|
||||
author = {Forsberg, Niclas and Malmqvist, Per-{\AA}ke},
|
||||
doi = {10.1016/S0009-2614(97)00669-6},
|
||||
issn = {0009-2614},
|
||||
journal = {Chemical Physics Letters},
|
||||
journal = {Chem. Phys. Lett.},
|
||||
number = {1},
|
||||
pages = {196--204},
|
||||
title = {Multiconfiguration Perturbation Theory with Imaginary Level Shift},
|
||||
@ -16490,7 +16479,7 @@
|
||||
author = {Shishkin, M. and Kresse, G.},
|
||||
date-modified = {2023-01-30 15:40:02 +0100},
|
||||
doi = {10.1103/PhysRevB.75.235102},
|
||||
journal = {Physical Review B},
|
||||
journal = {Phys. Rev. B},
|
||||
number = {23},
|
||||
pages = {235102},
|
||||
title = {Self-Consistent \${{GW}}\$ Calculations for Semiconductors and Insulators},
|
||||
@ -16502,7 +16491,7 @@
|
||||
author = {Wilhelm, Jan and Del Ben, Mauro and Hutter, J{\"u}rg},
|
||||
doi = {10.1021/acs.jctc.6b00380},
|
||||
issn = {1549-9618},
|
||||
journal = {Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation},
|
||||
journal = {J. Chem. Theory Comput.},
|
||||
number = {8},
|
||||
pages = {3623--3635},
|
||||
title = {{{GW}} in the {{Gaussian}} and {{Plane Waves Scheme}} with {{Application}} to {{Linear Acenes}}},
|
||||
@ -16514,7 +16503,7 @@
|
||||
author = {Gallandi, Lukas and K{\"o}rzd{\"o}rfer, Thomas},
|
||||
doi = {10.1021/acs.jctc.5b00820},
|
||||
issn = {1549-9618},
|
||||
journal = {Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation},
|
||||
journal = {J. Chem. Theory Comput.},
|
||||
number = {11},
|
||||
pages = {5391--5400},
|
||||
title = {Long-{{Range Corrected DFT Meets GW}}: {{Vibrationally Resolved Photoelectron Spectra}} from {{First Principles}}},
|
||||
@ -16525,7 +16514,7 @@
|
||||
@article{Korzdorfer_2012,
|
||||
author = {K{\"o}rzd{\"o}rfer, Thomas and Marom, Noa},
|
||||
doi = {10.1103/PhysRevB.86.041110},
|
||||
journal = {Physical Review B},
|
||||
journal = {Phys. Rev. B},
|
||||
number = {4},
|
||||
pages = {041110},
|
||||
title = {Strategy for Finding a Reliable Starting Point for \$\{\vphantom\}{{G}}\vphantom\{\}\_\{0\}\{\vphantom\}{{W}}\vphantom\{\}\_\{0\}\$ Demonstrated for Molecules},
|
||||
@ -16536,7 +16525,7 @@
|
||||
@article{Marom_2012,
|
||||
author = {Marom, Noa and Caruso, Fabio and Ren, Xinguo and Hofmann, Oliver T. and K{\"o}rzd{\"o}rfer, Thomas and Chelikowsky, James R. and Rubio, Angel and Scheffler, Matthias and Rinke, Patrick},
|
||||
doi = {10.1103/PhysRevB.86.245127},
|
||||
journal = {Physical Review B},
|
||||
journal = {Phys. Rev. B},
|
||||
number = {24},
|
||||
pages = {245127},
|
||||
title = {Benchmark of \${{GW}}\$ Methods for Azabenzenes},
|
||||
|
@ -212,7 +212,8 @@ and
|
||||
are bare two-electron integrals in the spin-orbital basis.
|
||||
|
||||
The diagonal matrix $\boldsymbol{\Omega}$ contains the positive eigenvalues of the RPA problen defined in Eq.~\eqref{eq:full_dRPA} and its elements $\Omega_\nu$ appear in Eq.~\eqref{eq:GW_selfenergy}.
|
||||
In the Tamm-Dancoff approximation (TDA), which is discussed in Appendix \ref{sec:nonTDA}, one sets $\bB = \bO$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq:full_dRPA} which reduces to a Hermitian eigenvalue problem of the form $\bA \bX = \bX \bOm$.
|
||||
In the Tamm-Dancoff approximation (TDA), one sets $\bB = \bO$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq:full_dRPA} which reduces to a Hermitian eigenvalue problem of the form $\bA \bX = \bX \bOm$.
|
||||
\ant{The corresponding TDA screened two-electron integrals are computed using Eq.~(\ref{eq:GW_sERI}) with $\bY=0$.}
|
||||
|
||||
Because of the frequency dependence of the self-energy, solving exactly the quasiparticle equation \eqref{eq:quasipart_eq} is a rather complicated task.
|
||||
Hence, several approximate schemes have been developed to bypass self-consistency.
|
||||
@ -255,7 +256,7 @@ which was first introduced by Faleev and co-workers \cite{Faleev_2004,vanSchilfg
|
||||
The corresponding matrix elements are
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
\label{eq:sym_qsGW}
|
||||
\Sigma_{pq}^{\text{qs}}(\eta) = \frac{1}{2} \sum_{r\nu} \qty( \frac{\Delta_{pr\nu}}{\Delta_{pr\nu}^2 + \titou{\eta^2}} +\frac{\Delta_{qr\nu}}{\Delta_{qr\nu}^2 + \titou{\eta^2}} ) W_ {p,r\nu} W_{q,r\nu}.
|
||||
\Sigma_{pq}^{\text{qs}}(\eta) = \frac{1}{2} \sum_{r\nu} \qty( \frac{\Delta_{pr\nu}}{\Delta_{pr\nu}^2 + \eta^2} +\frac{\Delta_{qr\nu}}{\Delta_{qr\nu}^2 + \eta^2} ) W_ {p,r\nu} W_{q,r\nu}.
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
with $\Delta_{pr\nu} = \epsilon_p - \epsilon_r - \sgn(\epsilon_r-\epsilon_F)\Omega_\nu$ (where $\epsilon_F$ is the energy of the Fermi level).
|
||||
One of the main results of the present manuscript is the derivation, from first principles, of an alternative static Hermitian form for the $GW$ self-energy.
|
||||
@ -267,7 +268,7 @@ If it is not the case, the qs$GW$ self-consistent scheme inevitably oscillates b
|
||||
|
||||
The satellites causing convergence problems are the above-mentioned intruder states.
|
||||
One can deal with them by introducing \textit{ad hoc} regularizers.
|
||||
\titou{The $\ii \eta$ term that is usually added in the denominators of the self-energy} [see Eq.~\eqref{eq:GW_selfenergy}] is similar to the usual imaginary-shift regularizer employed in various other theories affected by the intruder-state problem. \cite{Surjan_1996,Forsberg_1997,Monino_2022,Battaglia_2022}
|
||||
\ant{The $\ii\eta$ term in the denominators of Eq.~(\ref{eq:GW_selfenergy}), which stems from a regularization of the convolution to obtain $\Sigma$ and should theoretically be set to 0,\cite{Martin_2016} is similar to the usual imaginary-shift regularizer employed in various other theories plagued by the intruder-state problem. \cite{Surjan_1996,Forsberg_1997,Monino_2022,Battaglia_2022}.}
|
||||
Several other regularizers are possible \cite{Stuck_2013,Rostam_2017,Lee_2018a,Evangelista_2014b,Shee_2021} and in particular, it was shown in Ref.~\onlinecite{Monino_2022} that a regularizer inspired by the SRG had some advantages over the imaginary shift.
|
||||
Nonetheless, it would be more rigorous, and more instructive, to obtain this regularizer from first principles by applying the SRG formalism to many-body perturbation theory.
|
||||
This is the central aim of the present work.
|
||||
@ -338,7 +339,8 @@ Then, as performed in Sec.~\ref{sec:srggw}, one can collect order by order the t
|
||||
|
||||
By applying the SRG to $GW$, our aim is to gradually remove the coupling between the quasiparticle and the satellites resulting in a renormalized quasiparticle equation.
|
||||
However, to do so, one must identify the coupling terms in Eq.~\eqref{eq:quasipart_eq}, which is not straightforward.
|
||||
A way around this problem is to transform Eq.~\eqref{eq:quasipart_eq} to its upfolded version which elegantly highlights the coupling terms: \cite{Bintrim_2021,Tolle_2022}
|
||||
\ant{A way around this problem is to transform Eq.~\eqref{eq:quasipart_eq} to an equivalent upfolded form which elegantly highlights the coupling terms.
|
||||
Indeed, the $GW$ quasiparticle equation is equivalent to the diagonalization of the following matrix \cite{Bintrim_2021,Tolle_2022} }
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
\label{eq:GWlin}
|
||||
\begin{pmatrix}
|
||||
@ -376,8 +378,9 @@ and the corresponding coupling blocks read [see Eq.~(\ref{eq:GW_sERI})]
|
||||
\end{align}
|
||||
The usual $GW$ non-linear equation can be obtained by applying L\"owdin partitioning technique \cite{Lowdin_1963} to Eq.~\eqref{eq:GWlin} yielding \cite{Bintrim_2021}
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
\begin{split}
|
||||
\bSig(\omega)
|
||||
\begin{split}
|
||||
\label{eq:downfolded_sigma}
|
||||
\bSig(\omega)
|
||||
& = \bW^{\hhp} \qty(\omega \bI - \bC^{\hhp})^{-1} (\bW^{\hhp})^\dag
|
||||
\\
|
||||
& + \bW^{\pph} \qty(\omega \bI - \bC^{\pph})^{-1} (\bW^{\pph})^\dag,
|
||||
@ -431,7 +434,7 @@ where the supermatrices
|
||||
\end{align}
|
||||
\end{subequations}
|
||||
collect the 2h1p and 2p1h channels.
|
||||
Once the closed-form expressions of the low-order perturbative expansions are known, they can be inserted in Eq.~\eqref{eq:GWlin} before applying the downfolding process to obtain a renormalized version of the quasiparticle equation.
|
||||
Once the closed-form expressions of the low-order perturbative expansions are known, they can be inserted in Eq.~\eqref{eq:downfolded_sigma}\trashant{\eqref{eq:GWlin} before applying the downfolding process to obtain} to define a renormalized version of the quasiparticle equation.
|
||||
In particular, we focus here on the second-order renormalized quasiparticle equation.
|
||||
|
||||
%///////////////////////////%
|
||||
@ -488,13 +491,13 @@ Equation \eqref{eq:F0_C0} implies
|
||||
\begin{align}
|
||||
\bF^{(1)}(s) &= \bF^{(1)}(0) = \bO, & \bC^{(1)}(s) &= \bC^{(1)}(0) = \bO,
|
||||
\end{align}
|
||||
and, thanks to the \titou{diagonal structure of $\bF^{(0)}$} and $\bC^{(0)}$, the differential equation for the coupling block in Eq.~\eqref{eq:W1} is easily solved and yields
|
||||
and, thanks to the \ant{diagonal structure of $\bF^{(0)}$ (which is a consequence of the HF starting point)} and $\bC^{(0)}$, the differential equation for the coupling block in Eq.~\eqref{eq:W1} is easily solved and yields
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
W_{p,q\nu}^{(1)}(s) = W_{p,q\nu}^{(1)}(0) e^{- (F_{pp}^{(0)} - C_{q\nu,q\nu}^{(0)})^2 s}
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
At $s=0$ the elements $W_{p,q\nu}^{(1)}(0)$ are equal to the screened two-electron integrals defined in Eq.~\eqref{eq:GW_sERI}, while for $s\to\infty$, they tend to zero.
|
||||
Therefore, $W_{p,q\nu}^{(1)}(s)$ are genuine renormalized two-electron screened integrals.
|
||||
It is worth noting the close similarity of the first-order elements with the ones derived by Evangelista in Ref.~\onlinecite{Evangelista_2014b} \titou{in a different context} following a second quantization formalism (see also Ref.~\onlinecite{Hergert_2016}).
|
||||
\ant{It is worth noting the close similarity of the first-order elements with the ones derived by Evangelista in Ref.~\onlinecite{Evangelista_2014b} for the usual electronic Hamiltonian in the context of wave-function theory within a second quantization formalism (see also Ref.~\onlinecite{Hergert_2016}).}
|
||||
|
||||
%///////////////////////////%
|
||||
\subsection{Second-order matrix elements}
|
||||
@ -532,7 +535,7 @@ At $s=0$, the second-order correction vanishes while, for $s\to\infty$, it tends
|
||||
F_{pq}^{(2)}(\infty) = \sum_{r\nu} \frac{\Delta_{pr\nu}+ \Delta_{qr\nu}}{\Delta_{pr\nu}^2 + \Delta_{qr\nu}^2} W_{p,r\nu} W_{q,r\nu}.
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
Note that, in the limit $s\to\infty$, the dynamic part of the self-energy [see Eq.~\eqref{eq:srg_sigma}] tends to zero.
|
||||
\titou{Therefore, the SRG flow continuously transforms the dynamic part $\widetilde{\bSig}(\omega; s)$ into a static correction $\widetilde{\bF}(s)$.}
|
||||
\ant{Therefore, the SRG flow continuously kills the dynamic part $\widetilde{\bSig}(\omega; s)$ while creating a static correction $\widetilde{\bF}(s)$.}
|
||||
This transformation is done gradually starting from the states that have the largest denominators in Eq.~\eqref{eq:static_F2}.
|
||||
|
||||
%%% FIG 1 %%%
|
||||
@ -540,7 +543,7 @@ This transformation is done gradually starting from the states that have the lar
|
||||
\centering
|
||||
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig1.pdf}
|
||||
\caption{
|
||||
Functional form of the qs$GW$ self-energy (left) for $\eta = 1$ and the SRG-$GW$ self-energy (right) for $s = 1/(2\eta^2)$.
|
||||
Functional form of the qs$GW$ self-energy (left) for $\eta = 1$ and the SRG-qs$GW$ self-energy (right) for $s = 1/(2\eta^2)$.
|
||||
\label{fig:fig1}}
|
||||
\end{figure*}
|
||||
%%% %%% %%% %%%
|
||||
@ -640,10 +643,8 @@ Then the accuracy of the IP yielded by the traditional and SRG schemes will be s
|
||||
|
||||
This section starts by considering a prototypical molecular system, \ie the water molecule, in the aug-cc-pVTZ cartesian basis set.
|
||||
Figure~\ref{fig:fig1} shows the error of various methods for the principal IP with respect to the CCSD(T) reference value.
|
||||
The HF IP (dashed black line) is overestimated, this is a consequence of the missing correlation, a result which is now well understood. \cite{Lewis_2019} \ANT{I should maybe search for another ref as well.}
|
||||
\PFL{Check Szabo\&Ostlund, section on Koopman's theorem.}
|
||||
\ant{The HF IP (dashed black line) is overestimated, this is a consequence of the missing correlation and the lack of orbital relaxation for the cation, a result which is now well understood.} \cite{SzaboBook,Lewis_2019}
|
||||
The usual qs$GW$ scheme (dashed blue line) brings a quantitative improvement as the IP is now within \SI{0.3}{\electronvolt} of the reference.
|
||||
%The Neon atom is a well-behaved system and could be converged without regularisation parameter while for water $\eta$ was set to 0.01 to help convergence.
|
||||
|
||||
Figure~\ref{fig:fig1} also displays the SRG-qs$GW$ IP as a function of the flow parameter (blue curve).
|
||||
At $s=0$, the IP is equal to its HF counterpart as expected from the discussion of Sec.~\ref{sec:srggw}.
|
||||
@ -718,50 +719,50 @@ This project has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under
|
||||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||
The data that supports the findings of this study are available within the article.% and its supplementary material.
|
||||
|
||||
\appendix
|
||||
% \appendix
|
||||
|
||||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||
\section{Non-TDA $GW$ and $GW_{\text{TDHF}}$ equations}
|
||||
\label{sec:nonTDA}
|
||||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||
% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||
% \section{Non-TDA $GW$ and $GW_{\text{TDHF}}$ equations}
|
||||
% \label{sec:nonTDA}
|
||||
% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||
|
||||
The matrix elements of the $GW$ self-energy within the TDA are the same as in Eq.~\eqref{eq:GW_selfenergy} but the screened integrals are now defined as
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
\label{eq:GWnonTDA_sERI}
|
||||
W_{p,q\nu} = \sum_{ia}\eri{pi}{qa}\qty( \bX_{\nu})_{ia},
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
where $\bX$ is the eigenvector matrix of the TDA particle-hole dRPA problem obtained by setting $\bB= \bO$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq:full_dRPA}, \ie
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
\label{eq:TDA_dRPA}
|
||||
\bA \bX = \bX \boldsymbol{\Omega}.
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
% The matrix elements of the $GW$ self-energy within the TDA are the same as in Eq.~\eqref{eq:GW_selfenergy} but the screened integrals are now defined as
|
||||
% \begin{equation}
|
||||
% \label{eq:GWnonTDA_sERI}
|
||||
% W_{p,q\nu} = \sum_{ia}\eri{pi}{qa}\qty( \bX_{\nu})_{ia},
|
||||
% \end{equation}
|
||||
% where $\bX$ is the eigenvector matrix of the TDA particle-hole dRPA problem obtained by setting $\bB= \bO$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq:full_dRPA}, \ie
|
||||
% \begin{equation}
|
||||
% \label{eq:TDA_dRPA}
|
||||
% \bA \bX = \bX \boldsymbol{\Omega}.
|
||||
% \end{equation}
|
||||
|
||||
Defining an unfold version of this equation that does not require a diagonalization of the RPA problem before unfolding is a tricky task (see supplementary material of Ref.~\onlinecite{Bintrim_2021}).
|
||||
However, because we will eventually downfold again the upfolded matrix, we can use the following matrix \cite{Tolle_2022}
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
\label{eq:nonTDA_upfold}
|
||||
\begin{pmatrix}
|
||||
\bF & \bW^{\text{2h1p}} & \bW^{\text{2p1h}} \\
|
||||
(\bW^{\text{2h1p}})^{\mathrm{T}} & \bD^{\text{2h1p}} & \bO \\
|
||||
(\bW^{\text{2p1h}})^{\mathrm{T}} & \bO & \bD^{\text{2p1h}} \\
|
||||
\end{pmatrix}
|
||||
\cdot
|
||||
\begin{pmatrix}
|
||||
\bX \\
|
||||
\bY^{\text{2h1p}} \\
|
||||
\bY^{\text{2p1h}} \\
|
||||
\end{pmatrix}
|
||||
=
|
||||
\begin{pmatrix}
|
||||
\bX \\
|
||||
\bY^{\text{2h1p}} \\
|
||||
\bY^{\text{2p1h}} \\
|
||||
\end{pmatrix}
|
||||
\cdot
|
||||
\boldsymbol{\epsilon},
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
which already depends on the screened integrals and therefore require the knowledge of the eigenvectors of the dRPA problem defined in Eq.~\eqref{eq:full_dRPA}.
|
||||
Within the TDA the renormalized matrix elements have the same $s$ dependence as in the RPA case but the $s=0$ screened integrals $W_{p,q\nu}$ and eigenvalues $\Omega_\nu$ are replaced by the ones of Eq.~\eqref{eq:GWnonTDA_sERI} and \eqref{eq:TDA_dRPA}, respectively.
|
||||
% Defining an unfold version of this equation that does not require a diagonalization of the RPA problem before unfolding is a tricky task (see supplementary material of Ref.~\onlinecite{Bintrim_2021}).
|
||||
% However, because we will eventually downfold again the upfolded matrix, we can use the following matrix \cite{Tolle_2022}
|
||||
% \begin{equation}
|
||||
% \label{eq:nonTDA_upfold}
|
||||
% \begin{pmatrix}
|
||||
% \bF & \bW^{\text{2h1p}} & \bW^{\text{2p1h}} \\
|
||||
% (\bW^{\text{2h1p}})^{\mathrm{T}} & \bD^{\text{2h1p}} & \bO \\
|
||||
% (\bW^{\text{2p1h}})^{\mathrm{T}} & \bO & \bD^{\text{2p1h}} \\
|
||||
% \end{pmatrix}
|
||||
% \cdot
|
||||
% \begin{pmatrix}
|
||||
% \bX \\
|
||||
% \bY^{\text{2h1p}} \\
|
||||
% \bY^{\text{2p1h}} \\
|
||||
% \end{pmatrix}
|
||||
% =
|
||||
% \begin{pmatrix}
|
||||
% \bX \\
|
||||
% \bY^{\text{2h1p}} \\
|
||||
% \bY^{\text{2p1h}} \\
|
||||
% \end{pmatrix}
|
||||
% \cdot
|
||||
% \boldsymbol{\epsilon},
|
||||
% \end{equation}
|
||||
% which already depends on the screened integrals and therefore require the knowledge of the eigenvectors of the dRPA problem defined in Eq.~\eqref{eq:full_dRPA}.
|
||||
% Within the TDA the renormalized matrix elements have the same $s$ dependence as in the RPA case but the $s=0$ screened integrals $W_{p,q\nu}$ and eigenvalues $\Omega_\nu$ are replaced by the ones of Eq.~\eqref{eq:GWnonTDA_sERI} and \eqref{eq:TDA_dRPA}, respectively.
|
||||
|
||||
% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||
% \section{GF(2) equations \ant{NOT SURE THAT WE KEEP IT}}
|
||||
|
Binary file not shown.
Binary file not shown.
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user