On the difference between variational and unitary coupled cluster theories

被引:78
作者
Harsha, Gaurav [1 ]
Shiozaki, Toru [2 ]
Scuseria, Gustavo E. [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Rice Univ, Dept Phys & Astron, Houston, TX 77005 USA
[2] Northwestern Univ, Dept Chem, 2145 Sheridan Rd, Evanston, IL 60208 USA
[3] Rice Univ, Dept Chem, Houston, TX 77005 USA
关键词
BODY APPROXIMATION METHODS; SOLVABLE MODEL; EXCITED-STATES; WAVE-FUNCTION; LIPKIN MODEL; VALIDITY; FORMALISM;
D O I
10.1063/1.5011033
中图分类号
O64 [物理化学(理论化学)、化学物理学];
学科分类号
070304 ; 081704 ;
摘要
There have been assertions in the literature that the variational and unitary forms of coupled cluster theory lead to the same energy functional. Numerical evidence from previous authors was inconsistent with this claim, yet the small energy differences found between the two methods and the relatively large number of variational parameters precluded an unequivocal conclusion. Using the Lipkin Hamiltonian, we here present conclusive numerical evidence that the two theories yield different energies. The ambiguities arising from the size of the cluster parameter space are absent in the Lipkin model, particularly when truncating to double excitations. We show that in the symmetry adapted basis under strong correlation, the differences between the variational and unitary models are large, whereas they yield quite similar energies in the weakly correlated regime previously explored. We also provide a qualitative argument rationalizing why these two models cannot be the same. Additionally, we study a generalized non-unitary and non-hermitian variant that contains excitation, de-excitation, and mixed operators with different amplitudes and show that it works best when compared to the traditional, variational, unitary, and extended forms of coupled cluster doubles theories. Published by AIP Publishing.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 30 条
[21]   USE OF A SIZE-CONSISTENT ENERGY FUNCTIONAL IN MANY-ELECTRON THEORY FOR CLOSED SHELLS [J].
PAL, S ;
PRASAD, MD ;
MUKHERJEE, D .
THEORETICA CHIMICA ACTA, 1983, 62 (06) :523-536
[22]   EOMXCC: A new coupled-cluster method for electronic excited states [J].
Piecuch, P ;
Bartlett, RJ .
ADVANCES IN QUANTUM CHEMISTRY, VOL 34, 1999, 34 :295-380
[23]  
Ring P., 2004, The Nuclear Many-Body Problem
[24]   EXTENDED COUPLED-CLUSTER METHOD .4. AN EXCITATION-ENERGY FUNCTIONAL AND APPLICATIONS TO THE LIPKIN MODEL [J].
ROBINSON, NI ;
BISHOP, RF ;
ARPONEN, J .
PHYSICAL REVIEW A, 1989, 40 (08) :4256-4276
[25]  
Romero J., 2017, ARXIV170102691QUANTP
[26]   ALTERNATIVE ANSATZ IN SINGLE REFERENCE COUPLED-CLUSTER THEORY .3. A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENT METHODS [J].
SZALAY, PG ;
NOOIJEN, M ;
BARTLETT, RJ .
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS, 1995, 103 (01) :281-298
[27]   New perspectives on unitary coupled-cluster theory [J].
Taube, Andrew G. ;
Bartlett, Rodney J. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF QUANTUM CHEMISTRY, 2006, 106 (15) :3393-3401
[28]   STABILITY CONDITIONS AND NUCLEAR ROTATIONS IN THE HARTREE-FOCK THEORY [J].
THOULESS, DJ .
NUCLEAR PHYSICS, 1960, 21 (02) :225-232
[29]   Benchmark variational coupled cluster doubles results [J].
Van Voorhis, T ;
Head-Gordon, M .
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS, 2000, 113 (20) :8873-8879
[30]   Merging symmetry projection methods with coupled cluster theory: Lessons from the Lipkin model Hamiltonian [J].
Wahlen-Strothman, Jacob M. ;
Henderson, Thomas M. ;
Hermes, Matthew R. ;
Degroote, Matthias ;
Qiu, Yiheng ;
Zhao, Jinmo ;
Dukelsky, Jorge ;
Scuseria, Gustavo E. .
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS, 2017, 146 (05)