Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Non-periodic BC? #21

Open
nikita-astronaut opened this issue Nov 19, 2020 · 1 comment
Open

Non-periodic BC? #21

nikita-astronaut opened this issue Nov 19, 2020 · 1 comment

Comments

@nikita-astronaut
Copy link

Dear mVMC developers,

I have a question about how one could employ periodic boundary conditions with a twist. I am interested in (a) general twist, (b) twist \pi (antiperiodic).

In case of (b), there is just a special flag in mVMC, that switches on the APBC mode. I have a question on how to use this mode, namely

  1. This would modify the T_ij (kineric term elements) that go over the boundary, by multiplying by -1. Should I do it myself when I fill-in the trans.def file, or this will be done automatically?
  2. how I shall define the variational parameters (say, orbitals), if I use the APBC mode? In the PBC case, I would employ translational invariance, namely, f_{i, j} = f_{G(i), G(j)} where G is translation. Now, I need to introduce two "families" of f_ij: one for those f_ij that connect sites without crossing [in terms of shortest distance] the boundary and other family that goes over the boundary. Within each family I can use translational invariance?

Basically, there are several references, for instance https://journals.aps.org/prb/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevB.90.115137, where mVMC was used with APBC. I wonder, how one defines the variational parameters in this case?

Thanks a lot for your help!
Best wishes,
Nikita

@tmisawa
Copy link
Collaborator

tmisawa commented Jul 27, 2021

Dear Nikita,

I am sorry for the very late reply.
This reply may be too late for helping you, but I replied to your questions for your reference.

  1. In the standard mode, by specifying phase0 or phase1,
    you can treat the twisted boundary. For example,
    phase0=180 means the antiperiodic boundary conditions for a0 direction
    [ The phase factor Exp[i*(phase0/180)*pi] is added at the boundary].
    For more detail, please see the following manual.

https://issp-center-dev.github.io/mVMC/doc/en/html/standard.html?highlight=phase0

Please note that this mode is valid only for the itinerant electrons systems.

  1. If you employ the antiperiodic condition, f_{G(i), G(j)} should change its sign if G(i) or G(j) cross the boundary.
    For example, let consider 4-site chain (boundary exsits between site 0 and site 3) and 2 sub-lattice condition.
    Under +2 translation,
    T_{R=2} f_{0,3}C_{0↑} C_{3↓} changes as
    f_{0,3}C_{2↑}C_{5↓}=f_{0,3}C_{2↑} C_{5↓}=-f_{0,3}C_{2↑} C_{1↓}
    [sign change occurs because boundary exists between site 3 and site 5].
    Thie means f_{2,1} = -f(0,3) should be satisfied under antiperiodic boundary condition.

I hope this answer will be helpful for you.

Best,
Takahiro

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants