Simple model for the spherically- and system-averaged pair density: Results for two-electron atoms
ABSTRACT As shown by Overhauser and others, accurate pair densities for the uniform electron gas may be found by solving a two-electron scattering problem with an effective screened electron-electron repulsion. In this work we explore the extension of this approach to nonuniform systems, and we discuss its potential for density functional theory. For the spherically- and system-averaged pair density of two-electron atoms we obtain very accurate short-range properties, including, for nuclear charge $Z\ge 2$, ``on-top'' values (zero electron-electron distance) essentially indistinguishable from those coming from precise variational wavefunctions. By means of a nonlinear adiabatic connection that separates long- and short-range effects, we also obtain Kohn-Sham correlation energies whose error is less than 4 mHartree, again for $Z\ge 2$, and short-range-only correlation energies whose accuracy is one order of magnitude better. Comment: 9 pages, 6 figures (14 .eps files); revised version, to appear in Phys. Rev. A
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Attempts to generalize the density functional theory are summarized. A possible pair density functional theory is linked to the Overhauser parametrization of the electron- gas pair density. The importance of the cumulant partitioning is stressed and a modied Overhauser approach for the cumulant 2-body reduced density matrix, the contraction of which determines the 1-body reduced density matrix, is discussed. - SourceAvailable from: Kyung-Soo Yi[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: We first exploit the spin symmetry relation fss̅ xc(ζ)=fs̅ sxc(−ζ) for the exact exchange correlation kernel fss̅ xc(ζ) in an inhomogeneous many-electron system with arbitrary spin polarization ζ. The physical condition required to satisfy the specific symmetry relation fss̅ xc(ζ)=fs̅ sxc(ζ) is derived and examined for simple ferromagnetic-nonmagnetic structure by taking the electrochemical potential into account. The condition is then applied to several composite systems useful in spintronics applications such as the magnetic system with net spin polarization.Physical Review B 09/2006; 74(11). · 3.66 Impact Factor - [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: We propose a model for the angle- and system-averaged exchange-correlation hole of a many-electron system. This hole analyzes the exchange-correlation energy into contributions of various distances u from an electron. The model is “reverse-engineered” (derived from and not used to derive a density functional). It satisfies known exact hole constraints, including ones that can only be satisfied by a meta-generalized gradient approximation or meta-GGA. It incorporates the exchange-correlation energy density of the Tao-Perdew-Staroverov-Scuseria (TPSS) nonempirical meta-GGA. The hole model is tested for atoms and applied to jellium surfaces. The Fourier transform (u→k) of the hole is needed for wave-vector interpolation of the jellium surface energy from an exact small-k or large-u asymptote. We find essentially the same surface energies (close to the uncorrected TPSS values) whether we apply the wave-vector interpolation correction to the local spin density approximation, the GGA or the meta-GGA. These and other considerations suggest that these surface energies are accurate. Moreover, we find that the uncorrected TPSS surface energies have a realistic wave-vector analysis. Our TPSS hole model can be used to build the hole model for a TPSS-based global hybrid functional, or for a hyper-GGA that uses full exact exchange.Physical Review B 01/2006; 73(20). · 3.66 Impact Factor
Page 1
arXiv:cond-mat/0411179v2 [cond-mat.mtrl-sci] 8 Feb 2005
Simple model for the spherically- and system-averaged pair density:
Results for two-electron atoms
Paola Gori-Giorgi and Andreas Savin
Laboratoire de Chimie Th´ eorique, CNRS, Universit´ e Pierre et Marie Curie, 4 Place Jussieu, F-75252 Paris, France
(Dated: February 2, 2008)
As shown by Overhauser and others, accurate pair densities for the uniform electron gas may
be found by solving a two-electron scattering problem with an effective screened electron-electron
repulsion. In this work we explore the extension of this approach to nonuniform systems, and we
discuss its potential for density functional theory. For the spherically- and system-averaged pair
density of two-electron atoms we obtain very accurate short-range properties, including, for nuclear
charge Z ≥ 2, “on-top” values (zero electron-electron distance) essentially indistinguishable from
those coming from precise variational wavefunctions. By means of a nonlinear adiabatic connection
that separates long- and short-range effects, we also obtain Kohn-Sham correlation energies whose
error is less than 4 mHartree, again for Z ≥ 2, and short-range-only correlation energies whose
accuracy is one order of magnitude better.
I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF
RESULTS
Density Functional Theory (DFT) [1, 2, 3] is nowa-
days the most widely used method for electronic struc-
ture calculations, in both condensed matter physics and
quantum chemistry, thanks to a combination of low com-
putational cost and reasonable accuracy.
In the application of this theory within the Kohn-Sham
(KS) formalism [4], one deals with a model system (the
KS system) of N noninteracting electrons in a local po-
tential vKS(r) that forces them to yield the same density
n(r) of the physical system. The energy of the physi-
cal system is then obtained from that of the KS system
via a functional of the density, whose only term not ex-
plicitly known is the exchange-correlation energy Exc[n].
Correspondingly, in the local potential vKS(r) there is an
unknown term, vxc(r) = δExc[n]/δn(r).
The success of KS DFT is mostly due to the fact that
even simple physical approximations of Exc[n], like the
local density approximation (LDA) [4], already give ac-
ceptable results for many purposes. This spurred fun-
damental research in the field, and led to a wealth of
more and more sophisticated exchange-correlation func-
tionals [2, 3, 5], and to the development of different ap-
proaches to DFT [6, 7].
Recently, in the search for accurate Exc[n], the fo-
cus of a large part of the DFT community has shifted
from seeking explicit functionals of the density like the
generalized gradient approximations (GGA) [8], to im-
plicit functionals, tipically using the Kohn-Sham orbital
kinetic energy density [9] or the Kohn-Sham orbitals
(see, e.g., [3, 10, 11]). The so-called “third generation”
of exchange-correlation functionals is based on the ex-
act exchange of the noninteracting (KS) system, sim-
ply obtained by putting in the formal expression for the
Hartee-Fock exchange the Kohn-Sham orbitals ϕiσ(r).
Such expression corresponds to an implicit functional
of the density, Ex[n] = Ex[{ϕiσ[n]}]. The local poten-
tial vx(r) = δEx[n]/δn(r) that generates the orbitals
ϕiσ(r)[n] can be obtained via the optimized effective po-
tential method (OEP) [12].
In this broad context, sketchily summarized here, we
propose a simplified method to build the “bridge” be-
tween the physical and the KS system, or, more gener-
ally, with a reference model system of partially interact-
ing electrons. We focus on a quantity which is known to
play a crucial role in DFT and has an intuitive physical
meaning, the spherically and system-averaged electronic
pair density f(r12) (also known in chemistry as spherical
average of the intracule density, see e.g. [13, 14, 15, 16],
and especially [17, 18]). Given the spin-resolved diagonal
of the two-body reduced density matrix,
γ(2)
σ1σ2(r1,r2) =
?
σ3...σN
?
|Ψ(r1σ1,...,rNσN)|2dr3...drN,
(1)
we define the spin-summed pair density n2(r1,r2),
n2(r1,r2) =N(N − 1)
2
?
σ1σ2
γ(2)
σ1σ2(r1,r2), (2)
and we integrate it over all variables but r12= |r2− r1|
by switching, e.g., to center-of-mass coordinates, R =
1
2(r1+ r2), r12= r2− r1,
?
4π
f(r12) =dRdΩr12
n2
?
R −r12
2,R +r12
2
?
.(3)
The function f(r12) times the volume element 4πr2
is proportional to the probability density for the particle-
particle distance in a system of N electrons in the state
Ψ, and is normalized to the number of electron pairs,
N(N − 1)/2 .
pectation value of the electronic Coulomb repulsion (in
Hartree atomic units used throughout),
12dr12
This quantity fully determines the ex-
?Vee? ≡ ?Ψ|Vee|Ψ? =
?∞
0
4πr2
12
f(r12)
r12
dr12,(4)
and is a measurable quantity, being essentially the
Fourier transform of the electronic static structure fac-
tor [19]. By construction, the one-electron density n(r) is
Page 2
2
0
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.01
0.012
0.014
0 1 2 3
r12
4 5 6
f(r12)
’exact’
this work
Kohn-Sham
H-
0.04
0.08
0.12
0.16
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
f(r12)
r12
’exact’
this work
Kohn-Sham
He
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
f(r12)
r12
’exact’
this work
Kohn-Sham
Li+
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
f(r12)
r12
’exact’
this work
Kohn-Sham
Be2+
FIG. 1: Spherically and system-averaged pair densities for two-electron atoms: ’exact’ results [40] are compared with the values
obtained for the Kohn-Sham system and with the present approach, which is designed to get realistic f(r12) starting from the
Kohn-Sham ones.
the same in the KS and in the physical system, whereas
f(r12) will be different in the two cases, as shown, e.g., in
Fig. 1 for some two-electron atoms. In the physical sys-
tem f(r12) has a much lower “on-top” value f(r12= 0)
than in the KS system, and it has a cusp [20], as expected
from the fact that the electrons repel each other via the
Coulomb interaction. Roughly speaking, in the classic
DFT approach to correlation, the difference in energy
arising when we evaluate the r.h.s. of Eq. (4) with the
two f(r12), the physical and the KS, is what one tries to
describe with a universal functional of the density [21].
Here we follow a different approach: we try to build re-
alistic f(r12) from a set of simple radial equations, to be
solved for each system, and eventually coupled to a DFT
calculation.
Our approach is inspired by the seminal work of Over-
hauser [22] and its subsequent extension [23], in which the
function f(r12) for the uniform electron gas is obtained
from a set of geminals, solutions of a radial Schr¨ odinger
equation with an effective electron-electron (e-e) poten-
tial.Simple approximations for such effective e-e po-
tential give indeed accurate results at all relevant densi-
ties [23, 24, 25]. Here we try to generalize this approach
to systems of nonuniform density to get accurate f(r12).
The main goal of the present work is understanding
whether the method is promising, and whether it is worth
developing and refining it. To this purpose, we define the
formalism (Sec. II), we give a physically-motivated pre-
scription for the effective e-e potential (Sec. III), and we
test it on the simple but not trivial case of two-electron
atoms (Sec. IV). The prescription for the effective e-e
potential used here is not very sophisticated. Improve-
ments along the lines of what has been done for the uni-
form electron gas [23, 24, 25] will be the subject of future
work. Yet, even at this simple first stage of the theory
we already obtain rather accurate results, especially for
the short-range part of f(r12) (see Fig. 1 and Table I).
In Sec. V we show that with the present approach we can
also recover the difference in kinetic energy between the
physical and the KS system. Finally, Sec. VI is devoted
to conclusions, perspectives and open questions.
II.FORMALISM
In addition to the work on the “Overhausermodel” [22,
23, 24], the approach described here takes advantage of
inspiring papers on the possibility of constructing a pair-
density functional theory [26, 27, 28, 29], and a local-
density-of-states functional theory [30].
Our starting point is a constrained search over1
1) “effective” orthonormal geminals ψi(r12) that mini-
mize the electron-electron relative kinetic energy T12=
−∇2
2N(N−
r12(the reduced mass for the relative motion is 1/2)
Page 3
3
and yield the exact f,?
i|ψi(r12)|2= f(r12),
?
i
min
{ψi}→f
?ψi| − ∇2
r12|ψi?, (5)
thus leading to a set of radial equations formally similar
to the KS ones,
[−∇2
N(N−1)/2
?
i=1
r12+ veff(r12)]ψi(r12) = ǫiψi(r12) (6)
|ψi(r12)|2= f(r12). (7)
These equations imply that an expansion in spherical
harmonics of f(r12) has been done, so that the kinetic
energy operator also contains the usual ℓ(ℓ+1)/r2term.
To fully define these equations we need a rule for the oc-
cupancy of the effective geminals. In analogy with what
has been done for the uniform electron gas [23, 24], we
can assign spin degeneracy 1 to even-angular-momentum
states (singlet) and spin degeneracy 3 to odd-angular-
momentum states (triplet), up to N(N − 1)/2 occupied
states. More generally, for open shell systems it could
be better to develop the formalism for the spin-resolved
quantities, starting from Eq. (1). This will be investi-
gated in future work.
The effective electron-electron potential veff(r12) of
Eq. (6) is the Lagrange parameter for f(r12), and is a
functional of f itself and of the electron-nucleus external
potential Vne (or, equivalently, of the density n(r)). To
see this, we can rewrite our Eqs. (6)-(7) in terms of a
minimization of the total energy in two steps, using the
constrained search formalism [31, 32] for the ground state
energy E = minΨ?Ψ|T + Vee+ Vne|Ψ?,
E = min
f
min
Ψ→f
?
min
{ψi}→f
?
i
?ψi| − ∇2
r12|ψi? +
?
f
r12dr12
+?Ψ|T + Vne|Ψ? − min
{ψi}→f
?
i
?ψi| − ∇2
r12|ψi?
?
.(8)
Defining the kinetic and external-potential functional as
FKE[f;Vne] =
?ψi| − ∇2
min
Ψ→f?Ψ|T + Vne|Ψ? − min
{ψi}→f
?
i
r12|ψi?,(9)
we can rewrite
E = min
f
?
min
{ψi}→f
?
i
?
?ψi| − ∇2
r12|ψi? +
?
f
r12dr12
+FKE[f;Vne]. (10)
Searching this minimum by directly varying the ψi(with
given, fixed, Vne) leads to Eqs. (6)-(7) with the identifi-
cation
veff(r12) =
1
r12
+δFKE[f;Vne]
δf(r12)
. (11)
Thus, in principle we could recover the whole ground-
state energy via the (unknown) system-dependent func-
tional FKE[f;Vne]. In practice, it seems much more fea-
sible to combine Eqs. (6)-(7) with a DFT calculation,
that yields the complementary information (the density,
and thus ?Ψ|Vne|Ψ?). The steps of Eqs. (8)-(11) can be
repeated for arbitrary electron-electron interaction and
external one-body potential. In particular, we can set
Vλ
tential that keeps the density equal to the one of the
physical system. One could thus obtain fλat each cou-
pling strength λ between 0 and 1 from Eqs. (6)-(7) with
a suitable vλ
eff. The correlation energy of KS theory is
then simply given by [6, 33, 34]
ee= λVeeand Vne= Vλ, where Vλis an external po-
Ec[n] =
?1
0
dλ
?
dr12fλ(r12) − fλ=0(r12)
r12
. (12)
Alternatively, this procedure (usually called adiabatic
connection [34]) can be performed along a nonlinear path,
e.g., by setting [6, 35, 36, 37] vλ
erf(x) is the error function (see Sec. V). Eventually, the
two sets of equations, KS and (6)-(7) plus (12), could
be solved together self-consistently. This last issue is dis-
cussed in Sec. VI. Notice that if we combine Eqs. (6), (7)
and (12) with a DFT calculation, we only need to approx-
imate the potential vλ
eff(r12) and not the whole functional
FKEsince the remaining information is provided by DFT.
It is also worth to stress at this point that there is no
wavefunction behind our Eqs. (6)-(7): the effective gem-
inals ψiare defined via Eq. (5), and by specifying their
occupancy (e.g., triplet and singlet). A bosonic version
of the theory, in which only one geminal (proportional
to
?f(r12)) is occupied can also be considered [29, 38].
In this work we only focus on two-electron systems for
which the two choices are equivalent. A careful com-
parison of performances of the “fermion-like” and of the
“boson-like” occupancy in the uniform electron gas is the
subject of current investigations [39].
As for KS DFT, the formalism just described can be
useful only if simple approximations for veff(r12) yield ac-
curate results. This is what we start to check in the rest
of this paper. First, we construct a physically-motivated
veff for two-electron atoms for the fully-interacting sys-
tem, and we compare our results with “exact” ones [40].
Then, we generalize our construction to build veff along
the adiabatic connection, and we calculate the KS corre-
lation energy.
ee= erf(λr)/r, where
III.
POTENTIAL: THE OVERHAUSER MODEL
EFFECTIVE ELECTRON-ELECTRON
For the interacting electron gas of uniform density n,
Overhauser [22] proposed a simple and reasonable effec-
tive potential veff(r12): he took the sphere of volume n−1
around a given electron as the boundary within which
the other electrons are excluded, due to exchange and
Page 4
4
correlation effects. In the standard uniform-electron-gas
model, a rigid positively-charged background maintains
the electrical neutrality. Thus the exclusion region (or
“hole”) around a given electron, modeled with a sphere
of radius rs= (4πn/3)−1/3, uncovers the background of
positive charge, leading to an effective screened Coulomb
potential with screening length rs,
vOv
eff(r12;rs) =
1
r12
−
?
|r|≤rs
n
|r − r12|dr, (13)
equal to
vOv
eff(r12;rs) =
vOv
eff(r12;rs) =
1
r12+
r2
2r3
12
s−
0
3
2rs
r12≤ rs
r12> rs. (14)
Equations (6)-(7), combined with the Overhauser effec-
tive potential of Eq. (14) gave extremely accurate results
for the short-range part (r12≤ rs) of the function f(r12)
in the uniform electron gas at all relevant densities [23].
A more sophisticated effective potential, based on a self-
consistent Hartree approximation, extended such accu-
racy to the long-range part of f(r12) at metallic den-
sities [24]. Other approximate veff(r12) for the uniform
electron gas have also been proposed [25], and exact prop-
erties have been derived [41].
To produce realistic f(r12) for nonuniform systems
from Eqs. (6)-(7), here we generalize the original idea
of Overhauser [22, 23] to two-electron atoms, and show
that it gives rather accurate results, especially for the
short-rangepart of f(r12). We start from the effective po-
tential v(0)
eff(r12) that generates fKS(r12), the spherically-
and system averaged pair density of the Kohn-Sham sys-
tem.In the special case of a spin-compensated two-
electron system, the KS wavefunction is simply equal to
1
2
?n(r1)?n(r2). Because, at this first stage, we are in-
terested in testing our method as a “bridge” between
the KS and the real system, here we use the “exact”
Kohn-Sham system. We thus take accurate one-electron
densities [40], and construct fKS(r12),
fKS(r12) =1
4
?
n
?
R −r12
2
?
n
?
R +r12
2
?
dRdΩr12
4π
,
(15)
and the corresponding “exact” potential v(0)
can be calculated by inverting Eqs. (6)-(7),
eff(r12), that
v(0)
eff=∇2√fKS
√fKS
+ const.(16)
For systems with more than two electrons, the poten-
tial v(0)
effcould be calculated, e.g., with the methods of
Refs. [42, 43]. In practice, it would be much more efficient
to build approximations also for v(0)
amples of functions fKSfor nuclear charges Z = 1,2,3,4
are given in Fig. 1: they have a maximum at r12 = 0,
as expected in a system of two non-interacting electrons
with antiparallel spins in a confining one-body external
eff(see Sec. VI). Ex-
H−
2.1
He
0.86
Li+
0.54
Be2+
0.39
Ne8+
0.15rs
f(0)
“exact”
LDA
0.0021 0.104 0.528 1.526
0.0027 0.106 0.534 1.523
0.0047 0.119 0.563 1.587
32.6
32.7
33.0
rmax
12
“exact”
0.835
0.927
0.193 0.083 0.0465 0.0074
0.194 0.083 0.0465 0.0074
f(rmax
“exact”
12 )0.0031 0.114 0.55
0.0040 0.117 0.56
1.56
1.56
32.74
32.74
?Vee? − ?Vee?KS -0.12
“exact”
-0.097 -0.10
-0.078 -0.082 -0.089 -0.09
-0.10-0.10
-0.07
TABLE I: Our results for the function f(r12) for two-electron
atoms (first line for each property) compared with the corre-
sponding “exact” quantities [40]. In the first line of the table
we report the average rsas defined by Eqs. (17) and (19). For
the “on-top” value f(0) we also show the LDA result (with
f(0) for the uniform electron gas from Ref. [23]). All values
are in Hartree atomic units.
potential. When the interaction is turned on, the aver-
age distance between the two electrons increases, with
the constraint that n(r) is kept fixed. We can thus imag-
ine that, with respect to the Kohn-Sham system, in the
physical system the Coulomb repulsion between the elec-
trons creates, on average, a screening “hole” around the
reference electron of volume (n)−1, where n is an average
density (i.e., n(r) integrated over the wavefunction),
n =
1
N
?
drn(r)2.(17)
An approximate veff(r12) could thus be simply con-
structed as
veff(r12) ≈ v(0)
eff(r12) + vOv
eff(r12;rs) (18)
with an average rsin vOv
effof Eq. (14),
rs=?4π
3n?−1/3.(19)
The Overhauser-like potential vOv
relation potential to be added to the one that generates
fKS. It describes the correlation between pairs of elec-
trons due to Coulomb interaction, and keeps the informa-
tion on the one-electron density in an approximate way,
via the average n of Eq. (17). Of course, for more com-
plicated systems we expect to need a more sophisticated
construction for rs.
eff(r12;rs) is thus a cor-
IV.RESULTS
We have inserted the potential of Eq. (18) into Eqs. (6)-
(7), and solved them for several two-electron atoms. Our
results are shown in Fig. 1 and summarized in Table I.
Page 5
5
We see that the simple effective potential of Eq. (18) gives
already reasonable results for Z = 1 and 2, and that the
accuracy of the results increases with Z (as the system
becomes less and less correlated). The “on-top” value
f(0) is essentially exact for Z ≥ 2, and is much better
than the LDA estimate (normally regarded as accurate)
for all Z. This feature is appealing, since the on-top value
plays an important role in DFT [44], and accurate f(0)
are not easy to obtain from ab initio methods (see, e.g.,
Ref. [45] and references therein). The term 1/r12in the
effective potential ensures that the calculated f(r12) sat-
isfies the exact cusp condition f′(0) = f(0). Table I also
shows that the position rmax
12
the maximum of f is very well predicted by the present
approach. The presence of this maximum is essentially
due to the combined effect of the Coulomb repulsion be-
tween the electrons and the confining external potential.
In Fig. 2 we consider He and Ne8+, and we compare
the correlated part of our f, fc = f − fKS, with the
“exact” result [40] and with the corresponding quantity
calculated within LDA, i.e.,
and the height f(rmax
12 ) of
fLDA
c
(r12) =1
2
?
n(r)2gc(r12;n(r))dr,(20)
where gc is the pair-correlation function of the uni-
form electron gas at full coupling strength, taken from
Ref. [46]. (For an extended system of uniform density n,
we have gc= 2fc/nN.) Figure 3 shows the same quanti-
ties multiplied by 4πr12, i.e. the integrand of Eq. (4) for
the correlation part of ?Vee?: the area under each curve
gives ?Vee?−?Vee?KS. In the last line of Table I we report
quantitative results for ?Vee?−?Vee?KS. This quantity is
less accurate than the short-range properties, but it is
still encouraging. Moreover, it saturates for large Z as in
the exact case.
V.ADIABATIC CONNECTION AND
CORRELATION ENERGY
For the calculation of the energy of the physical sys-
tem, in addition to Vc[n] = ?Vee?−?Vee?KS, one needs to
know the kinetic-energy difference, Tc[n] = ?T?−?T?KS,
that can be obtained via the adiabatic connection for-
malism [6, 33, 34]. By varying a parameter λ, the in-
teraction vλ
ee(r12) between the electrons is switched on
continuously from zero to 1/r12, while the density is
kept fixed by an external one-body potential Vλ.
vλ=0
ee
= 0 and vλ=a
ee
= 1/r12, the KS correlation energy
Ec[n] = Tc[n] + Vc[n] is given by [6, 34]
If
Ec[n] =
?a
0
dλ
?∞
0
dr124π r2
12fλ
c(r12)∂vλ
ee(r12)
∂λ
, (21)
where fλ
Usually, the adiabatic connection is performed along a
linear “path” [11, 33], by setting vλ
to Eq. (12). If one is able to compute the exact fλ
c= fλ− fKS.
ee= λ/r12, which leads
c, the
-0.08
-0.06
-0.04
-0.02
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
fc(r12)
r12
He
’exact’
this work
LDA
-4
-3.5
-3
-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
fc(r12)
r12
Ne8+
’exact’
this work
LDA
FIG. 2: The correlated part of the spherically- and system-
averaged pair density, fc(r12) = f(r12)−fKS(r12). Our results
for He and Ne8+are compared with the “exact” ones and with
the LDA result (the hole for the uniform electron gas is taken
from Ref. [46]).
resulting Ecfrom Eq. (21) is independent of the choice
of vλ
ee. However, when approximations are made some
“paths” can give much better results than others [6]. As
we shall see, this is the case with the present approach.
We build an Overhauser-like potential for interaction
vλ
eff) as
ee(to be added to v(0)
vOv, λ
eff
(r12;rs) = vλ
ee(r12)−
?
|r|≤rs
nvλ
ee(|r−r12|)dr. (22)
That is, the average density n of Eq. (17) (and thus
the average rs) is kept fixed to mimic the fact that the
one-electron density does not change along the adiabatic
connection. The modified interaction vλ
a sphere of radius rs and of positive uniform charge of
density n that attracts the electrons with the same mod-
ified interaction.This attractive background approxi-
mates the effect of the external potential Vλon f.
eeis screened by
A.Linear adiabatic connection
If we choose vλ
vOv, λ
eff
(r12;rs) = λvOv
given by Eq. (14).
The results for ?Vλ
shown in Fig. 4, and are compared with the “exact”
ones of Ref. [42].The correlation energy Ec can be
ee
=λ/r12
we simply obtain
eff(r12;rs) is
eff(r12;rs), where vOv
ee? − ?Vee?KS for He and Ne8+are
Page 6
6
-0.016
-0.012
-0.008
-0.004
0
0.004
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
4 π fc(r12) r12
r12
He
’exact’
this work
LDA
-0.12
-0.1
-0.08
-0.06
-0.04
-0.02
0
0.02
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
r12
4 π fc(r12) r12
Ne8+
’exact’
this work
LDA
FIG. 3: The real space analysis of the correlation part of
the expectation value of Vee: the area under each curve gives
?Vee? − ?Vee?KS (see also Eq. (4) and Fig. 2). Our results for
He and Ne8+are compared with the “exact” ones and with
the LDA result (the hole for the uniform electron gas is taken
from Ref. [46]).
calculated as the area under each curve.
Ec = −0.052 Hartree for He and Ec = −0.053 Hartree
for Ne8+, to be compared with the corresponding ’exact’
results, -0.042 and -0.045, respectively.
We obtain
B.A nonlinear adiabatic connection
As shown by Figs. 1–3 and Table I, the Overhauser-like
potential gives accurate results for the short-range part of
fc(r12). We can thus expect to obtain better correlation
energies from the adiabatic connection formalism if we
choose a modified interaction vλ
long-range and short-range contributions, like the “erf”
interaction [6, 35, 36, 37]
eethat is able to separate
vλ
ee(r12) =erf(λr12)
r12
.(23)
With this choice, Eq. (21) becomes
Ec[n] =
?∞
0
dλ
?∞
0
dr124π r2
12fλ
c(r12)
2
√πe−λ2r2
12. (24)
For large λ, when we are approaching the physical sys-
tem, the gaussian factor e−λ2r2
long-range contribution of fλ
cto the energy integrand. At
the KS end of the adiabatic connection, when λ → 0, the
12in Eq. (24) quenches the
-0.1
-0.08
-0.06
-0.04
-0.02
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
〈Vλ
ee〉 − 〈Vee〉KS
λ
He
’exact’
this work
-0.12
-0.1
-0.08
-0.06
-0.04
-0.02
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
〈Vλ
ee〉 − 〈Vee〉KS
λ
Ne8+
’exact’
this work
FIG. 4: Correlation part of ?Vλ
connection for He and Ne8+. Our results are compared with
the “exact” ones of Ref. [42]. The area under each curve gives
the correlation energy Ec of standard Kohn-Sham theory.
ee? along the linear adiabatic
interaction, and thus fλ
tribution to Eccoming from λ-values for which the long-
range part of fλ
cis not quenched is moderate. Moreover,
the function fλ
cis correctly normalized to zero so that for
λ → 0, not only is fλ
vanishes. In the linear adiabatic connection of Eq. (12),
instead, the long-range part of fλ
role in the energy integrand at all λ. Indeed, with this
nonlinear adiabatic connection we obtain Ec= −0.0405
Hartree for He and Ec= −0.0413 for Ne8+, much closer
to the “exact” values with respect to the results from the
linear adiabatic connection.
The technical details of this calculation are as fol-
lows.The potential vOv, λ
eff
be computed analytically, and is reported in Ap-
pendix A. We thus obtained, via Eqs. (6)-(7), dEλ
?dr12fλ
20 for He, and between 0 and 100 for Ne8+. We then fit-
ted our results with the derivative of the following func-
tional form
c, become small, so that the con-
csmall, but also the integral itself
cplays an important
(r12;rs) of Eq. (22) can
c/dλ =
c(r12)
2
√πe−λ2r2
12for 23 values of λ between 0 and
Eλ
c= −a1x6+ a2x8+ a3x10
(1 + b2x2)5
,x =λ
Z,
(25)
that has exact asymptotic behaviors for small and large
λ [37].(We have numerical evidence that our results
fulfill such exact behaviors.)
numerical values for dEλ
c/dλ, together with the derivative
of the fitting function of Eq. (25). The parameters and
In Fig. 5 we report our
Page 7
7
-0.014
-0.012
-0.01
-0.008
-0.006
-0.004
-0.002
0
0 5 10
λ
15 20
dEλ
c / dλ
He
fit
results
-0.0025
-0.002
-0.0015
-0.001
-0.0005
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
dEλ
c / dλ
λ
Ne8+
fit
results
FIG. 5: The derivative dEλ
connection defined by Eqs. (23)–(24) for He and Ne8+. Our
results are compared with the derivative of the fitting function
of Eq. (25). The area under each curve from zero to ∞ gives
the correlation energy Ec of standard Kohn-Sham theory.
c/dλ along the nonlinear adiabatic
the r.m.s of residuals are reported in Table II. The KS
correlation energy Ec[n] is then given by a3/b10.
The accuracy of our results with the “erf” adiabatic
connection is of particular interest for the method of
Refs. [6, 35, 36, 37], which combines multideterminantal
wavefunctions (configuration interaction, CI) with den-
sity functional theory (“CI+DFT”). In such approach,
instead of the KS system, one choses a reference system
of partially interacting particles, usually with the poten-
tial of Eq. (23). This model system is treated with a
multideterminantal wavefunction, in a CI fashion, that
allows to treat near-degeneracy effects. The remaining
part of the energy is calculated via a density functional,
that needs to be approximated. The larger λ, the larger
is the energy fraction treated with the CI calculation,
and thus the larger is the computational cost. The corre-
lation energy functional that needs to be approximated
is [6, 35, 36, 37]
E
λ
c[n] ≡ Ec[n] − Eλ
c[n], (26)
and can be rewritten as
?∞
E
λ
c[n] =
λ
dλ′
?∞
0
dr124π r2
12fλ′
c(r12)
2
√πe−λ′2r2
12.
(27)
Thus, only the short-range part of fλ
functional E
c[n], and we expect to get accurate results
with the present approach. Indeed, this is the case, as
ccontributes to the
λ
a1
a2
a3
b r.m.s.
He1.2047 2.3253 2.7788 1.5263 4·10−5
Ne8+0.3983 0.4711 0.4026 1.2557 9·10−6
TABLE II: Optimal fit parameters and r.m.s of the residuals
for the derivative of Eq. (25), that parametrizes our results
for dEλ
by Eqs. (23)–(24). See also Fig. 5.
c/dλ along the nonlinear adiabatic connection defined
-0.05
-0.04
-0.03
-0.02
-0.01
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Ec − Ec
λ
λ
He
’exact’
this work
-0.05
-0.04
-0.03
-0.02
-0.01
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
λ
Ec − Ec
λ
Ne8+
’exact’
this work
FIG. 6: A nonlinear adiabatic connection that separates long-
and short-range effects: difference between the correlation en-
ergy Ec of the physical system (with full interaction 1/r) and
the correlation energy Eλ
tion erf(λr)/r, for He and Ne8+. Our results are compared
with the “exact” ones of Ref. [36].
c of the system with partial interac-
shown in Fig. 6, where we compare our results as a func-
tion of λ with the “exact” ones of Ref. [36]. The error
is less than 0.5 mHartree for λ ? 1/rs, that is a very
reasonable choice for the value of λ to be used in the
CI+DFT method of Refs. [6, 35, 36, 37].
VI. CONCLUSIONS AND PERSPECTIVES
In this work we have started to explore the possibil-
ity of solving simple radial equations to generate realistic
spherically- and system-averaged electronic pair densities
f(r12) for nonuniform systems. With a simple approxi-
mation for the unknown effective electron-electron inter-
action that appears in our formalism, we have obtained,
for two-electron atoms, results that are in fair agreement
with those coming from accurate variational wavefunc-
Page 8
8
tions (Figs. 1–3 and Table I). We have then extended
our approach along a nonlinear adiabatic connection and
obtained Kohn-Sham correlation energies whose error is
less than 4 mHartrees, and short-range-only correlation
energies whose accuracy is one order of magnitude better
(Fig. 6).
In Sec. II, we have introduced a general formalism for
many-electron systems that will be further tested in fu-
ture work. So far we can say that this formalism, com-
bined with simple physical approximations, works very
well for two completely different systems: the uniform
electron gas [23, 24, 25] and the He series. We think that
this fact makes the method promising.
To fully develop the approach described in this paper,
many steps have to be performed. First of all, the KS
part of the effective e-e potential, v(0)
should be also approximated, to make the extension to
many-electron systems practical. The correlation part of
the effective e-e potential can be improved, in analogy
with the recent developments for the uniform electron-
gas case [24, 25]. It should then be possible to construct
a self-consistent scheme (OEP-like) that combines the
Kohn-Sham equations with the correlation energy func-
tional arising from our approach [Eqs. (6)-(7) at different
coupling strengths λ, plus Eq. (12) or Eq. (24)]. With
respect to traditional DFT calculations, this combined
scheme would have the advantage of yielding not only
the ground-state one-electron density n(r) and energy E,
but also the spherically- and system-averaged pair den-
sity f(r12), thus allowing to calculate expectation values
eff(r12) of Eq. (18),
of two-body operators that only depend on the electron-
electron distance. The combination of our approach with
the CI+DFT method of Refs. [6, 35, 36, 37] could be also
implemented and, in view of the results of Fig. 6, it is
even more promising. We are presently working in all of
these main directions.
Acknowledgments
We thank C. Umrigar for the wavefunctions of
Ref. [40], J. Toulouse for the results of Ref. [36], E.K.U.
Gross, W. Kohn, M. Polini, G. Vignale and P. Ziesche
for encouraging discussions, V. Sahni for useful hints,
and J.K. Percus for helpful suggestions. This research
was supported by a Marie Curie Intra-European Fellow-
ships within the 6th European Community Framework
Programme (contract number MEIF-CT-2003-500026).
APPENDIX A: OVERHAUSER-LIKE
POTENTIAL FOR THE ERF INTERACTION
The evaluation of Eq. (22) with the interaction vλ
erf(λr12)/r12gives
ee=
vOv, λ
eff
(r12;rs) =u(s,µ)
rs
, (A1)
where s = r12/rs, µ = λrs, and
u(s,µ) =erf(µs)
s
−
1
8√π sµ3
?
2
?
1 +?−2 + s + s2?µ2+ e−4s µ2(−1 +?2 + s − s2?µ2)
erf [µ (1 − s)] +√π µ
?
e−(1−s)2µ2−
√π µ
?
3s + 2(1 − s)2(2 + s) µ2?
?
−3s + 2 (2 − s) (1 + s)2µ2?
erf [µ (1 + s)]
?
.(A2)
[1] W. Kohn, Rev. Mod. Phys. 71, 1253 (1999).
[2] A.E. Mattsson, Science 298, 759 (2002).
[3] C. Fiolhais, F. Nogueira, and M. Marques (eds.), A
Primer in Density Functional Theory (Springer-Verlag,
Berlin, 2003).
[4] W. Kohn and L.J. Sham, Phys. Rev. 140, A1133 (1965).
[5] J.P. Perdew and K. Schmidt, in Density Functional The-
ory and Its Applications to Materials, edited by V. Van-
Doren et al. (AIP, NY, 2001), and references therein.
[6] A. Savin, F. Colonna, and R. Pollet, Int. J. Quantum
Chem. 93, 166 (2003), and references therein.
[7] V. Sahni, Quantal Density Functional Theory (Springer-
Verlag, Berlin, 2004).
[8] J.P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Phys. Rev.
Lett. 77, 3865 (1996); ibid. 78, 1396 (1997); A.D. Becke,
Phys. Rev. A 38, 3098 (1988); J. Chem. Phys. 84, 4524
(1986); C. Lee, W. Yang, and R.G. Parr, Phys. Rev. B
37, 785 (1988); J.P. Perdew, J.A. Chevary, S.H. Vosko,
K.A. Jackson, M.R. Pederson, D.J. Singh, and C. Fiol-
hais, Phys. Rev. B. 46, 6671 (1992); ibid. 48, 4978 (1993).
[9] J. Tao, J.P. Perdew, V.N. Staroverov, and G.E. Scuseria,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 146401 (2003).
[10] J.P. Perdew, A. Ruzsinszky, J. Tao, V.N. Staroverov,
G.E. Scuseria, and G.I. Csonka, J. Chem. Phys., to ap-
pear.
[11] M. Seidl, J.P. Perdew, and S. Kurth, Phys. Rev. Lett.
84, 5070 (2000).
[12] see, e.g., S. K¨ ummel and J.P. Perdew, Phys. Rev. B 68,
035103 (2003); W. Yang and Q. Wu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89,
143002 (2002); R. J. Magyar, A. Fleszar, and E. K. U.
Page 9
9
Gross, Phys. Rev. B 69, 045111 (2004); M. Gr¨ uning, O.
V. Gritsenko, and E. J. Baerends, J. Chem. Phys. 118,
7183 (2003).
[13] C.A. Coulson and A.H. Neilson, Proc. Phys. Soc. London
78, 831 (1961).
[14] J. Cioslowski, B.B. Stefanov, A. Tan, and C.J. Umrigar,
J. Chem. Phys. 103, 6093 (1995).
[15] J. Cioslowski and G. Liu, J. Chem. Phys. 109, 8225
(1998).
[16] E. Valderrama, J.M. Ugalde, and R.J. Boyd, in Many-
electron densities and reduced density matrices, edited
by J. Cioslowski (Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers,
New York, 2000).
[17] E.R. Davidson, Reduced Density Matrices in Quantum
Chemistry (Academic Press, New York, 1976).
[18] A.J. Coleman and V.I. Yukalov, Reduced Density Ma-
trices: Coulson’s Challenge (Springer-Verlag, New York,
2000).
[19] see, e.g., G. Mazzone, F. Sacchetti, and V. Contini, Phys.
Rev. B 28, 1772 (1983); C. Petrillo and F. Sacchetti, ibid.
51, 4755 (1995).
[20] A. K. Rajagopal, J. C. Kimball, and M. Banerjee, Phys.
Rev. B 18, 2339 (1978); X.-Y. Pan and V. Sahni, J.
Chem. Phys. 119, 7083 (2003).
[21] The difference in kinetic energy can be obtained from
the adiabatic connection formula that can be viewed as
a generalization of the above argument, and is treated in
Sec. V.
[22] A.W. Overhauser, Can. J. Phys. 73, 683 (1995).
[23] P. Gori-Giorgi and J.P. Perdew, Phys. Rev. B 64, 155102
(2001).
[24] B. Davoudi, M. Polini, R. Asgari, and M.P. Tosi, Phys.
Rev. B 66, 075110 (2002).
[25] M. Corona, P. Gori-Giorgi, and J.P. Perdew, Phys. Rev.
B 69, 045108 (2004); I. Nagy, R. Diez Mui˜ no, J.I. Juar-
isti, and P.M. Echenique, Phys. Rev. B 69, 233105
(2004).
[26] P. Ziesche, Phys. Lett. A 195, 213 (1994); M. Levy and
P. Ziesche, J. Chem. Phys. 115, 9110 (2001).
[27] A. Gonis, T.G. Schulthess, J. van Ek, and P.E.A. Turchi,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2981 (1996); A. Gonis, T.G.
Schulthess, P.E.A. Turchi, and J. van Ek, Phys. Rev.
B 56, 9335 (1997).
[28] A. Nagy, Phys. Rev. A 66, 022505 (2002).
[29] F. Furche, Phys. Rev. A 70, 022514 (2004).
[30] J.M. Soler, Phys. Rev. B 69, 195101 (2004).
[31] M. Levy, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 76, 6062 (1979).
[32] E. Lieb, Int. J. Quantum Chem. 24, 243 (1983).
[33] J. Harris and R. Jones, J. Phys. F 4, 1170 (1974); D.C.
Langreth and J.P. Perdew, Solid State Commun. 17,
1425 (1975); O. Gunnarsson and B.I. Lundqvist, Phys.
Rev. B 13, 4274 (1976).
[34] W. Yang, J. Chem. Phys. 109, 10107 (1998).
[35] A. Savin, in Recent Developments and Applications of
Modern Density Functional Theory, edited by J.M. Sem-
inario (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1996); T. Leininger, H.
Stoll, H.-J. Werner, and A. Savin, Chem. Phys. Lett.
275, 151 (1997); R. Pollet, A. Savin, T. Leininger, and
H. Stoll, J. Chem. Phys. 116, 1250 (2002).
[36] R. Pollet, F. Colonna, T. Leininger, H. Stoll, H.-J.
Werner, and A. Savin, Int. J. Quantum Chem. 91, 84
(2003); J. Toulouse, private communication.
[37] J. Toulouse, F. Colonna, and A. Savin, Phys. Rev. A 70,
062505 (2004).
[38] B. Davoudi, R. Asgari, M. Polini, and M.P. Tosi, Phys.
Rev. B 68, 155112 (2003); R. Asgari, B. Davoudi, and
M.P. Tosi, Solid State Comm. 131, 301 (2004).
[39] R. Asgari, B. Davoudi, M. Polini, and M.P. Tosi, in
preparation.
[40] D.E. Freund, B.D. Huxtable, and J.D. Morgan III, Phys.
Rev. A 29, 980 (1984). We used an improved version
(provided to us by C. Umrigar) of the accurate varia-
tional wavefunctions described in this work to obtain one-
electron densities n(r) and functions f(r12). See also C.J.
Umrigar and X. Gonze, Phys. Rev. A 50, 3827 (1994),
and Ref. [14].
[41] P. Ziesche, Phys. Rev. B 67, 233102 (2003); P. Ziesche,
K. Pernal, and F. Tasn´ adi, Phys. Status Solidi B 239, 185
(2003). In these papers interesting exact properties of the
“Overhauser geminals” are derived, using the interacting
momentum distribution to define the geminal occupancy.
Notice however that the uniform-electron gas equivalent
of our Eqs. (6)-(7) employ the non-interacting momen-
tum distribution, as it has been done in Refs. [23, 24, 25].
[42] F. Colonna and A. Savin, J. Chem. Phys. 110, 2828
(1999).
[43] Q. Zhao, R. C. Morrison, and R. G. Parr, Phys. Rev.
A 50, 2138 (1994); R. van Leeuwen and E. J. Baerends
Phys. Rev. A 49, 2421 (1994).
[44] J.P. Perdew, A. Savin, and K. Burke, Phys. Rev. A, 51,
4531 (1995); K. Burke, J.P. Perdew, and M. Ernzerhof, J.
Chem. Phys. 109, 3760 (1998); E. Valderrama and J.M.
Ugalde, Int. J. Quantum Chem. 86, 40 (2002).
[45] X. Fradera, M. Duran, E. Valderrama, and J.M. Ugalde,
Phys. Rev. A 62, 034502 (2000).
[46] P. Gori-Giorgi and J.P. Perdew, Phys. Rev. B 66, 165118
(2002).
View other sources
Hide other sources
- Available from Paola Gori-Giorgi · May 19, 2014
- Available from arxiv.org