changes in theory
This commit is contained in:
parent
e0afadbf98
commit
ce162eaeb9
@ -568,15 +568,6 @@
|
||||
}\href@noop {} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Phys. Rev. Lett.}\
|
||||
}\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {77}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {3865} (\bibinfo {year}
|
||||
{1996})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
|
||||
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Gori-Giorgi}\ and\ \citenamefont
|
||||
{Savin}(2006{\natexlab{b}})}]{GoriSav-PRA-06}%
|
||||
\BibitemOpen
|
||||
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {P.}~\bibnamefont
|
||||
{Gori-Giorgi}}\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {A.}~\bibnamefont
|
||||
{Savin}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevA.73.032506} {\bibfield {journal}
|
||||
{\bibinfo {journal} {Phys. Rev. A}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {73}},\
|
||||
\bibinfo {pages} {032506} (\bibinfo {year} {2006}{\natexlab{b}})}\BibitemShut
|
||||
{NoStop}%
|
||||
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Paziani}\ \emph {et~al.}(2006)\citenamefont
|
||||
{Paziani}, \citenamefont {Moroni}, \citenamefont {Gori-Giorgi},\ and\
|
||||
\citenamefont {Bachelet}}]{PazMorGorBac-PRB-06}%
|
||||
@ -588,6 +579,15 @@
|
||||
}\href@noop {} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Phys. Rev. B}\
|
||||
}\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {73}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {155111} (\bibinfo
|
||||
{year} {2006})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
|
||||
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Gori-Giorgi}\ and\ \citenamefont
|
||||
{Savin}(2006{\natexlab{b}})}]{GoriSav-PRA-06}%
|
||||
\BibitemOpen
|
||||
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {P.}~\bibnamefont
|
||||
{Gori-Giorgi}}\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {A.}~\bibnamefont
|
||||
{Savin}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevA.73.032506} {\bibfield {journal}
|
||||
{\bibinfo {journal} {Phys. Rev. A}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {73}},\
|
||||
\bibinfo {pages} {032506} (\bibinfo {year} {2006}{\natexlab{b}})}\BibitemShut
|
||||
{NoStop}%
|
||||
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Gritsenko}, \citenamefont {van Meer},\ and\
|
||||
\citenamefont {Pernal}(2018)}]{GritMeePer-PRA-18}%
|
||||
\BibitemOpen
|
||||
|
@ -77,7 +77,7 @@
|
||||
\newcommand{\emulda}[0]{\bar{\varepsilon}^{\text{sr},\text{unif}}_{\text{c,md}}\left(\denr;\mu({\bf r};\wf{}{\Bas})\right)}
|
||||
\newcommand{\emuldamodel}[0]{\bar{\varepsilon}^{\text{sr},\text{unif}}_{\text{c,md}}\left(\denmodelr;\mu({\bf r};\wf{}{\Bas})\right)}
|
||||
\newcommand{\emuldaval}[0]{\bar{\varepsilon}^{\text{sr},\text{unif}}_{\text{c,md}}\left(\denval ({\bf r});\murval;\wf{}{\Bas})\right)}
|
||||
\newcommand{\ecmd}[0]{\varepsilon^{\text{c,md}}_{\text{PBE}}}
|
||||
\newcommand{\ecmd}[0]{\bar{\varepsilon}_{\text{c,md}}^{\text{sr},\text{PBE}}}
|
||||
\newcommand{\psibasis}[0]{\Psi^{\basis}}
|
||||
\newcommand{\BasFC}{\mathcal{A}}
|
||||
|
||||
@ -109,12 +109,12 @@
|
||||
%%%%%% arguments
|
||||
|
||||
\newcommand{\argepbe}[0]{\den,\zeta,s}
|
||||
\newcommand{\argebasis}[0]{\den,\zeta,s,\ntwo,\mu_{\Psi^{\basis}}}
|
||||
\newcommand{\argebasis}[0]{\den,\zeta,\ntwo,\mu}
|
||||
\newcommand{\argecmd}[0]{\den,\zeta,s,\ntwo,\mu}
|
||||
\newcommand{\argepbeueg}[0]{\den,\zeta,s,\ntwo^{\text{UEG}},\mu_{\Psi^{\basis}}}
|
||||
\newcommand{\argepbeontxicas}[0]{\den,\zeta,s,\ntwoextrapcas,\mu_{\text{CAS}}^{\basis}}
|
||||
\newcommand{\argepbeuegXihf}[0]{\den,\tilde{\zeta},s,\ntwo^{\text{UEG}},\mu_{\Psi^{\basis}}}
|
||||
\newcommand{\argrebasis}[0]{\denr,\zeta(\br{}),s,\ntwo(\br{}),\mu_{\Psi^{\basis}}(\br{})}
|
||||
\newcommand{\argrebasis}[0]{\denr,\zeta(\br{}),s(\br{}),\ntwo(\br{}),\mu(\br{})}
|
||||
\newcommand{\argrebasisab}[0]{\denr,\zeta(\br{}),s,\ntwo(\br{}),\mu_{\Psi^{\basis}}(\br{})}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@ -244,6 +244,7 @@
|
||||
\newcommand{\hWee}[1]{\Hat{W}_\text{ee}^{#1}}
|
||||
\newcommand{\f}[2]{f_{#1}^{#2}}
|
||||
\newcommand{\Gam}[2]{\Gamma_{#1}^{#2}}
|
||||
\newcommand{\isEquivTo}[1]{\underset{#1}{\sim}}
|
||||
|
||||
% coordinates
|
||||
\newcommand{\br}[1]{{\mathbf{r}_{#1}}}
|
||||
@ -434,9 +435,7 @@ Because of the very definition of $\wbasis$, one has the following property in t
|
||||
which is again fundamental to guarantee the correct behavior of the theory in the CBS limit.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Frozen-core approximation}
|
||||
As all WFT calculations for the purpose of that work are performed within the frozen core approximation, we use the valence-only versions of the various quantities needed for the complementary basis set functional introduced in Ref. \cite{LooPraSceTouGin-JCPL-19}.
|
||||
We split the basis set as $\Bas = \Cor \bigcup \BasFC$ (where $\Cor$ and $\BasFC$ are the sets of core and active MOs, respectively)
|
||||
and define the valence only range separation parameter
|
||||
As all WFT calculations in this work are performed within the frozen-core approximation, we use the valence-only version of the various quantities needed for the complementary basis functional introduced in Ref.~\onlinecite{LooPraSceTouGin-JCPL-19}. We partition the basis set as $\Bas = \Cor \bigcup \BasFC$, where $\Cor$ and $\BasFC$ are the sets of core and active orbitals, respectively, and define the valence-only local range-separation parameter as
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
\label{eq:def_mur_val}
|
||||
\murpsival = \frac{\sqrt{\pi}}{2} \wbasiscoalval{},
|
||||
@ -446,69 +445,67 @@ where $\wbasisval$ is the valence-only effective interaction defined as
|
||||
\label{eq:wbasis_val}
|
||||
\wbasisval =
|
||||
\begin{cases}
|
||||
\fbasisval /\twodmrdiagpsi, & \text{if $\twodmrdiagpsival \ne 0$,}
|
||||
\fbasisval /\twodmrdiagpsival, & \text{if $\twodmrdiagpsival \ne 0$,}
|
||||
\\
|
||||
\infty, & \text{otherwise,}
|
||||
\end{cases}
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
where $\fbasisval$ is defined as
|
||||
where $\fbasisval$ and $\twodmrdiagpsival$ are defined as
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
\label{eq:fbasis_val}
|
||||
\fbasisval
|
||||
= \sum_{pq\in \Bas} \sum_{rstu \in \BasFC} \SO{p}{1} \SO{q}{2} \V{pq}{rs} \Gam{rs}{tu} \SO{t}{1} \SO{u}{2},
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
and $\twodmrdiagpsival$
|
||||
and
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
\label{eq:twordm_val}
|
||||
\twodmrdiagpsival = \sum_{pqrs \in \BasFC} \SO{p}{1} \SO{q}{2} \Gam{pq}{rs} \SO{r}{1} \SO{s}{2},
|
||||
\twodmrdiagpsival = \sum_{pqrs \in \BasFC} \SO{p}{1} \SO{q}{2} \Gam{pq}{rs} \SO{r}{1} \SO{s}{2}.
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
Notice the summations on the active set of orbitals in equations \eqref{eq:fbasis_val} and \eqref{eq:twordm_val}.
|
||||
It is noteworthy that, within the present definition, $\wbasisval$ still tends to the regular Coulomb interaction as $\Bas \to \CBS$.
|
||||
Notice the restrictions of the sums to the set of active orbitals in Eqs.~\eqref{eq:fbasis_val} and \eqref{eq:twordm_val}.
|
||||
It is noteworthy that, with the present definition, $\wbasisval$ still tends to the usual Coulomb interaction as $\Bas \to \CBS$.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Generic form and properties of the approximations for $\efuncden{\denr}$ }
|
||||
\subsection{Generic form and properties of the approximations for $\efuncden{\den}$ }
|
||||
\label{sec:functional}
|
||||
\subsubsection{Generic form of the approximated functionals}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Generic form of the approximate functionals}
|
||||
\label{sec:functional_form}
|
||||
As originally proposed and motivated in Ref. \onlinecite{GinPraFerAssSavTou-JCP-18}, we approximate the complementary basis set functional $\efuncden{\denr}$ by using the so-called multi-determinant correlation functional (ECMD) introduced by Toulouse and co-workers\cite{TouGorSav-TCA-05}.
|
||||
Following the recent work of some of the present authors\cite{LooPraSceTouGin-JCPL-19}, we propose to use a PBE-like functional which uses the total density $\denr$, spin polarisation $\zeta(\br{})$, reduced density gradient $s(\br{}) = \nabla \denr/\denr^{4/3}$ and the on-top pair density $\ntwo(\br{})$. In the present work, all the density-related quantities are computed with the same wave function $\psibasis$ used to define $\murpsi$.
|
||||
Therefore, a given approximation X of $\efuncden{\denr}$ have the following generic form
|
||||
|
||||
As originally proposed and motivated in Ref. \onlinecite{GinPraFerAssSavTou-JCP-18}, we approximate the complementary basis functional $\efuncden{\den}$ by using the so-called correlation energy functional with multideterminant reference (ECMD) introduced by Toulouse \textit{et al.}~\cite{TouGorSav-TCA-05}. Following the recent work in Ref.~\onlinecite{LooPraSceTouGin-JCPL-19}, we propose to use a Perdew-Burke-Ernzerhof (PBE)-like functional which uses the total density $\denr$, the spin polarisation $\zeta(\br{})=[n_\uparrow(\br{})-n_\downarrow(\br{})]/\denr$, the reduced density gradient $s(\br{}) = \nabla \denr/\denr^{4/3}$, and the on-top pair density $\ntwo(\br{})\equiv \ntwo(\br{},\br{})$. In the present work, all these quantities are computed with the same wave function $\psibasis$ used to define $\mur \equiv\murpsi$. Therefore, a given approximation X of $\efuncden{\den}$ will have the following generic local form
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
\begin{aligned}
|
||||
\label{eq:def_ecmdpbebasis}
|
||||
\efuncdenpbe{\argebasis} = &\int d\br{} \,\denr \\ & \ecmd(\argrebasis)
|
||||
&\efuncdenpbe{\argebasis} = \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\; \\ &\int \d\br{} \,\denr \ecmd(\argrebasis),
|
||||
\end{aligned}
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
where $\ecmd(\argecmd)$ is the ECMD correlation energy density defined as
|
||||
where $\ecmd(\argecmd)$ is the correlation energy per particle taken as
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
\label{eq:def_ecmdpbe}
|
||||
\ecmd(\argecmd) = \frac{\varepsilon_{\text{c,PBE}}(\argepbe)}{1+ \mu^3 \beta(\argepbe)}
|
||||
\ecmd(\argecmd) = \frac{\varepsilon_{\text{c}}^{\text{PBE}}(\argepbe)}{1+ \beta(\argepbe) \; \mu^3},
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
with
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
\label{eq:def_beta}
|
||||
\beta(\argebasis) = \frac{3}{2\sqrt{\pi}(1 - \sqrt{2})}\frac{\varepsilon_{\text{c,PBE}}(\argepbe)}{\ntwo/\den},
|
||||
\beta(\argepbe) = \frac{3}{2\sqrt{\pi}(1 - \sqrt{2})}\frac{\varepsilon_{\text{c}}^{\text{PBE}}(\argepbe)}{\ntwo/\den},
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
and where $\varepsilon_{\text{c,PBE}}(\argepbe)$ is the usual PBE correlation energy density\cite{PerBurErn-PRL-96}. Before introducing the different flavour of approximated functionals that we will use here (see \ref{sec:def_func}), we would like to give some motivations for the such a choice of functional form.
|
||||
where $\varepsilon_{\text{c}}^{\text{PBE}}(\argepbe)$ is the usual PBE correlation energy per particle~\cite{PerBurErn-PRL-96}. Before introducing the different flavors of approximate functionals that we will use here (see Section~\ref{sec:def_func}), we would like to give some motivations for this choice of functional form.
|
||||
|
||||
The actual functional form of $\ecmd(\argecmd)$ have been originally proposed by some of the present authors in the context of RSDFT~\cite{FerGinTou-JCP-18} in order to fulfill the two following limits
|
||||
The functional form of $\ecmd(\argecmd)$ in Eq.~\ref{eq:def_ecmdpbe} has been originally proposed in Ref.~\onlinecite{FerGinTou-JCP-18} in the context of RSDFT. In the $\mu\to 0$ limit, it reduces to the usual PBE correlation functional
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
\lim_{\mu \rightarrow 0} \ecmd(\argecmd) = \varepsilon_{\text{c,PBE}}(\argepbe),
|
||||
\lim_{\mu \rightarrow 0} \ecmd(\argecmd) = \varepsilon_{\text{c}}^{\text{PBE}}(\argepbe),
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
which can be qualified as the weak correlation regime, and the large $\mu$ limit
|
||||
which is relevant in the weak-correlation (or high-density) limit. In the large-$\mu$ limit, it behaves as
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
\label{eq:lim_mularge}
|
||||
\ecmd(\argecmd) = \frac{1}{\mu^3} \ntwo + o(\frac{1}{\mu^5}),
|
||||
\ecmd(\argecmd) \isEquivTo{\mu\to\infty} \frac{2\sqrt{\pi}(1 - \sqrt{2})}{3 \mu^3} \frac{\ntwo}{n},
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
which, as it was previously shown\cite{TouColSav-PRA-04, GoriSav-PRA-06,PazMorGorBac-PRB-06} by various authors, is the exact expression for the ECMD in the limit of large $\mu$, provided that $\ntwo$ is the \textit{exact} on-top pair density of the system.
|
||||
In the context of RSDFT, some of the present authors have illustrated in Ref.~\onlinecite{FerGinTou-JCP-18} that the on-top pair density involved in eq. \eqref{eq:def_ecmdpbe} plays a crucial role when reaching the strong correlation regime. The importance of the on-top pair density in the strong correlation regime have been also acknowledged by Pernal and co-workers\cite{GritMeePer-PRA-18} and Gagliardi and co-workers\cite{CarTruGag-JPCA-17}.
|
||||
Also, $\ecmd(\argecmd) $ vanishes when $\ntwo$ vanishes
|
||||
which is the exact large-$\mu$ behavior of the exact ECMD correlation energy~\cite{PazMorGorBac-PRB-06,FerGinTou-JCP-18}. Of course, for a specific system, the large-$\mu$ behavior will be exact only if one uses for $n_2$ the \textit{exact} on-top pair density of this system. This large-$\mu$ limit in Eq.~\eqref{eq:lim_mularge} is relevant in the strong-correlation (or low-density) limit. In the context of RSDFT, some of the present authors have illustrated in Ref.~\onlinecite{FerGinTou-JCP-18} that the on-top pair density involved in Eq. \eqref{eq:def_ecmdpbe} plays indeed a crucial role when reaching the strong-correlation regime. The importance of the on-top pair density in the strong-correlation regime have been also recently acknowledged by Gagliardi and coworkers~\cite{CarTruGag-JPCA-17} and Pernal and coworkers\cite{GritMeePer-PRA-18}.
|
||||
|
||||
Note also that $\ecmd(\argecmd)$ vanishes when $\ntwo$ vanishes
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
\label{eq:lim_n2}
|
||||
\lim_{\ntwo \rightarrow 0} \ecmd(\argecmd) = 0
|
||||
\lim_{\ntwo \rightarrow 0} \ecmd(\argecmd) = 0,
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
which is exact for systems with a vanishing on-top pair density, such as the totally dissociated H$_2$ which is the archetype of strongly correlated systems.
|
||||
Also, the function $\ecmd(\argecmd)$ vanishes when $\mu \rightarrow \infty$ as all RSDFT functionals
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
which is expected for systems with a vanishing on-top pair density, such as the totally dissociated H$_2$ molecule which is the archetype of strongly correlated systems. Finally, the function $\ecmd(\argecmd)$ vanishes when $\mu \rightarrow \infty$ like all RSDFT short-range functionals \begin{equation}
|
||||
\label{eq:lim_muinf}
|
||||
\lim_{\mu \rightarrow \infty} \ecmd(\argecmd) = 0.
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
@ -535,7 +532,7 @@ Another important requirement is the independence of the energy with respect to
|
||||
Such a property is also important in the context of covalent bond breaking where the ground state of the super system $A+B$ is in general of low spin while the ground states of the fragments $A$ and $B$ are in high spin which can have multiple $S_z$ components.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Condition for the functional $\efuncdenpbe{\argebasis}$ to obtain $S_z$ invariance}
|
||||
A sufficient condition to achieve $S_z$ invariance is to eliminate all dependency to $S_z$, which in the case of $\ecmd(\argecmd)$ is the spin polarisation $\zeta(\br{})$ involved in the correlation energy density $\varepsilon_{\text{c,PBE}}(\argepbe)$ (see equation \eqref{eq:def_ecmdpbe}).
|
||||
A sufficient condition to achieve $S_z$ invariance is to eliminate all dependency to $S_z$, which in the case of $\ecmd(\argecmd)$ is the spin polarisation $\zeta(\br{})$ involved in the correlation energy density $\varepsilon_{\text{c}}^{\text{PBE}}(\argepbe)$ (see equation \eqref{eq:def_ecmdpbe}).
|
||||
As originally shown by Perdew and co-workers\cite{PerSavBur-PRA-95}, the dependence on the spin polarisation in the KS-DFT framework can be removed by the rewriting the spin polarisation of a single Slater determinant with only the on-top pair density and the total density. In other terms, the spin density dependence usually introduced in the correlation functionals of KS-DFT tries to mimic the effect of the on-top pair density.
|
||||
Based on this reasoning, a similar approach has been used in the context of multi configurational DFT in order to remove the $S_z$ dependency.
|
||||
In practice, these approaches introduce the effective spin polarisation
|
||||
@ -553,7 +550,7 @@ The advantages of this approach are at least two folds: i) the effective spin p
|
||||
Nevertheless, the use of $\tilde{\zeta}$ presents several disadvantages as it can become complex when $n^2 - 4 \ntwo^{\psibasis}<0$ and also
|
||||
the formula of equation \eqref{eq:def_effspin} is exact only when the density $n$ and on-top pair density $\ntwo^{\psibasis}$ are obtained from a single determinant\cite{PerSavBur-PRA-95}, but it is applied to multi configurational wave functions.
|
||||
|
||||
An alternative to eliminate the $S_z$ dependency would be to simply set $\zeta(\br{})=0$, but this would lower the accuracy of the usual correlation functional, such as the PBE correlation functional used here $\varepsilon_{\text{c,PBE}}(\argepbe)$. Nevertheless, as the spin polarisation usually tries to mimic the on-top pair density and the function $\ecmd(\argecmd)$ explicitly depends on the on-top pair density (see equations \eqref{eq:def_ecmdpbe} and \eqref{eq:def_beta}), we propose here to use the $\ecmd$ functional with \textit{a zero spin polarisation}. This ensures a $S_z$ invariance and, as will be numerically shown, very weakly affect the accuracy of the functional.
|
||||
An alternative to eliminate the $S_z$ dependency would be to simply set $\zeta(\br{})=0$, but this would lower the accuracy of the usual correlation functional, such as the PBE correlation functional used here $\varepsilon_{\text{c}}^{\text{PBE}}(\argepbe)$. Nevertheless, as the spin polarisation usually tries to mimic the on-top pair density and the function $\ecmd(\argecmd)$ explicitly depends on the on-top pair density (see equations \eqref{eq:def_ecmdpbe} and \eqref{eq:def_beta}), we propose here to use the $\ecmd$ functional with \textit{a zero spin polarisation}. This ensures a $S_z$ invariance and, as will be numerically shown, very weakly affect the accuracy of the functional.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Conditions on $\psibasis$ for the extensivity}
|
||||
In the case of the present basis set correction, as $\efuncdenpbe{\argebasis}$ is an integral over $\mathbb{R}^3$ of local quantities, in the case of non overlapping fragments $A\ldots B$ it can be written as the sum of two local contributions: one coming from the integration over the region of the sub-system $A$ and the other one from the region of the sub-system $B$.
|
||||
@ -569,7 +566,7 @@ The condition for the active space involved in the CASSCF wave function is that
|
||||
As the present work focusses on the strong correlation regime, we propose here to investigate only approximated functionals which are $S_z$ invariant and size extensive in the case of covalent bond breaking. Therefore, the wave function $\psibasis$ used throughout this paper are of CASSCF type in order to ensure extensivity of all density related quantities.
|
||||
The difference between the different flavours of functionals are only on i) the type of on-top pair density used, and ii) the type of spin polarisation used.
|
||||
|
||||
Regarding the spin polarisation that enters into $\varepsilon_{\text{c,PBE}}(\argepbe)$, two different types of $S_z$ invariant formulations are used: i) the \textit{effective} spin polarization $\tilde{\zeta}$ defined in equation \eqref{eq:def_effspin}, and iii) a \textit{zero} spin polarization.
|
||||
Regarding the spin polarisation that enters into $\varepsilon_{\text{c}}^{\text{PBE}}(\argepbe)$, two different types of $S_z$ invariant formulations are used: i) the \textit{effective} spin polarization $\tilde{\zeta}$ defined in equation \eqref{eq:def_effspin}, and iii) a \textit{zero} spin polarization.
|
||||
|
||||
Regarding the approximation to the \textit{exact} on-top pair density entering in equation \eqref{eq:def_beta}, we use two different approximations. The first one is based on the uniform electron gas (UEG) and reads
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user