minor corrections in intro
This commit is contained in:
parent
f54e14995f
commit
299b0c07ab
@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ Having low energies does not mean that they are good for chemical properties.
|
||||
Solving the Schr\"odinger equation for the ground state of atoms and molecules is a complex task that has kept theoretical and computational chemists busy for almost hundred years now. \cite{Schrodinger_1926}
|
||||
In order to achieve this formidable endeavour, various strategies have been carefully designed and efficiently implemented in various quantum chemistry software packages.
|
||||
|
||||
One of \manu{these} strategies consists in relying on wave function theory \cite{Pople_1999} (WFT) and, in particular, on the full configuration interaction (FCI) method.
|
||||
One of these strategies consists in relying on wave function theory \cite{Pople_1999} (WFT) and, in particular, on the full configuration interaction (FCI) method.
|
||||
However, FCI delivers only an approximate solution of the Schr\"odinger equation within a finite basis (FB) of one-electron basis functions, the FB-FCI energy being an upper bound to the exact energy in accordance with the variational principle.
|
||||
The FB-FCI wave function and its corresponding energy form the eigenpair of an approximate Hamiltonian defined as
|
||||
the projection of the exact Hamiltonian onto the finite many-electron basis of
|
||||
@ -113,8 +113,8 @@ Present-day DFT calculations are almost exclusively done within the so-called Ko
|
||||
transfers the complexity of the many-body problem to the exchange-correlation (xc) functional thanks to a judicious mapping between a non-interacting reference system and its interacting analog which both have exactly the same one-electron density.
|
||||
KS-DFT \cite{Hohenberg_1964,Kohn_1965} is now the workhorse of electronic structure calculations for atoms, molecules and solids thanks to its very favorable accuracy/cost ratio. \cite{ParrBook}
|
||||
As compared to WFT, DFT has the indisputable advantage of converging much faster with respect to the size of the basis set. \cite{FraMusLupTou-JCP-15,Loos_2019d,Giner_2020}
|
||||
However, \manu{there is no systematic way of refining the approximation of the unknown exact xc functional, and therefore in practice }
|
||||
one faces the unsettling choice of the \emph{approximate} xc functional\cite{Becke_2014}. \sout{ which makes inexorably KS-DFT hard to systematically improve. }
|
||||
\titou{However, there is no systematic way of refining the approximation of the unknown exact xc functional, and therefore in practice
|
||||
one faces the unsettling choice of the \emph{approximate} xc functional. \cite{Becke_2014}}
|
||||
Moreover, because of the approximate nature of the xc functional, although the resolution of the KS equations is variational, the resulting KS energy does not have such property.
|
||||
|
||||
Diffusion Monte Carlo (DMC), which belongs to the family of stochastic methods, is yet another numerical scheme to obtain
|
||||
@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ approximation.
|
||||
However, because it is not possible to minimize directly the FN-DMC energy with respect
|
||||
to the linear and non-linear parameters of the trial wave function, the
|
||||
fixed-node approximation is much more difficult to control than the
|
||||
finite-basis approximation\manu{, especially to compute energy differences}.
|
||||
finite-basis approximation, especially to compute energy differences.
|
||||
The conventional approach consists in multiplying the trial wave
|
||||
function by a positive function, the \emph{Jastrow factor}, taking
|
||||
account of the bulk of the dynamical correlation.
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user