done iteration for T2
This commit is contained in:
parent
194d038410
commit
982f34eaa0
@ -1255,7 +1255,7 @@ drastically.
|
|||||||
%If, for some reason, $W_0\approx W_1\approx W_{01}=W$, then the error
|
%If, for some reason, $W_0\approx W_1\approx W_{01}=W$, then the error
|
||||||
%reduces to $-W/2$, which is weight-independent (it fits for example with
|
%reduces to $-W/2$, which is weight-independent (it fits for example with
|
||||||
%what you see in the weakly correlated regime). Such an assumption depends on the nature of the
|
%what you see in the weakly correlated regime). Such an assumption depends on the nature of the
|
||||||
%excitation, not only on the correlation strength, right? Neverthless,
|
%excitation, not only on the correlation strength, right? Nevertheless,
|
||||||
%when looking at your curves, this assumption cannot be made when the
|
%when looking at your curves, this assumption cannot be made when the
|
||||||
%correlation is strong. It is not clear to me which integral ($W_{01}?$)
|
%correlation is strong. It is not clear to me which integral ($W_{01}?$)
|
||||||
%drives the all thing.\\}
|
%drives the all thing.\\}
|
||||||
@ -1325,7 +1325,7 @@ For small $L$, the single and double excitations can be labeled as
|
|||||||
``pure'', as revealed by a thorough analysis of the FCI wavefunctions.
|
``pure'', as revealed by a thorough analysis of the FCI wavefunctions.
|
||||||
In other words, each excitation is dominated by a sole, well-defined reference Slater determinant.
|
In other words, each excitation is dominated by a sole, well-defined reference Slater determinant.
|
||||||
However, when the box gets larger (\ie, as $L$ increases), there is a strong mixing between the different excitation degrees.
|
However, when the box gets larger (\ie, as $L$ increases), there is a strong mixing between the different excitation degrees.
|
||||||
In particular, the single and double excitations strongly mix, which makes their assignment as single or double excitations more discutable. \cite{Loos_2019}
|
In particular, the single and double excitations strongly mix, which makes their assignment as single or double excitations more \titou{disputable}. \cite{Loos_2019}
|
||||||
This can be clearly evidenced by the weights of the different configurations in the FCI wave function.
|
This can be clearly evidenced by the weights of the different configurations in the FCI wave function.
|
||||||
% TITOU: shall we keep the paragraph below?
|
% TITOU: shall we keep the paragraph below?
|
||||||
%Therefore, it is paramount to construct a two-weight correlation functional
|
%Therefore, it is paramount to construct a two-weight correlation functional
|
||||||
@ -1446,8 +1446,11 @@ The influence of the correlation ensemble derivative becomes substantial in the
|
|||||||
\titou{For 3-boxium, in the zero-weight limit, its contribution is also significantly larger in the case of the single
|
\titou{For 3-boxium, in the zero-weight limit, its contribution is also significantly larger in the case of the single
|
||||||
excitation; the reverse is observed in the equal-weight triensemble
|
excitation; the reverse is observed in the equal-weight triensemble
|
||||||
case.
|
case.
|
||||||
Howver, for 5- and 7-boxium, the correlation ensemble derivative hardly
|
However, for 5- and 7-boxium, the correlation ensemble derivative hardly
|
||||||
influences the double excitation (except when the correlation is strong), and slightly deteriorates the single excitation in the intermediate and strong correlation regimes}.
|
influences the double excitation (except when the correlation is strong), and slightly deteriorates the single excitation in the intermediate and strong correlation regimes.
|
||||||
|
This non-systematic behavior in terms of the number of electrons might be a consequence of how we constructed the weight-dependent functional.
|
||||||
|
Indeed, as mentioned in Sec.~\ref{sec:eDFA}, the weight dependence of the eLDA functional is based on a two-electron finite uniform electron gas.
|
||||||
|
Therefore, it might be more appropriate to model the derivative discontinuity in few-electron systems.}
|
||||||
Importantly, \titou{for the single excitation}, one realizes that the magnitude of the correlation ensemble
|
Importantly, \titou{for the single excitation}, one realizes that the magnitude of the correlation ensemble
|
||||||
derivative is \trashPFL{much} smaller in the case of equal-weight calculations (as
|
derivative is \trashPFL{much} smaller in the case of equal-weight calculations (as
|
||||||
compared to the zero-weight calculations).
|
compared to the zero-weight calculations).
|
||||||
@ -1457,7 +1460,7 @@ compared to the zero-weight calculations).
|
|||||||
This could explain why equiensemble calculations are clearly more
|
This could explain why equiensemble calculations are clearly more
|
||||||
accurate \titou{for the single excitation} as it reduces the influence of the ensemble correlation derivative:
|
accurate \titou{for the single excitation} as it reduces the influence of the ensemble correlation derivative:
|
||||||
for a given method, equiensemble orbitals partially remove the burden
|
for a given method, equiensemble orbitals partially remove the burden
|
||||||
of modeling properly the ensemble correlation derivative.
|
of modelling properly the ensemble correlation derivative.
|
||||||
%\manu{Manu: I
|
%\manu{Manu: I
|
||||||
%do not like this statement. As I wrote above, the ensemble derivative is
|
%do not like this statement. As I wrote above, the ensemble derivative is
|
||||||
%still substantial in the strongly correlated limit of the equi
|
%still substantial in the strongly correlated limit of the equi
|
||||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user