- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review B

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Letter
  • Open Access

Quantum embedding description of the Anderson lattice model with the ghost Gutzwiller approximation

Marius S. Frank1, Tsung-Han Lee2, Gargee Bhattacharyya1, Pak Ki Henry Tsang3, Victor L. Quito4,3, Vladimir Dobrosavljević3, Ove Christiansen5, and Nicola Lanatà1,6,*

  • 1Department of Physics and Astronomy, Aarhus University, 8000, Aarhus C, Denmark
  • 2Physics and Astronomy Department, Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey 08854, USA
  • 3Department of Physics and National High Magnetic Field Laboratory, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida 32306, USA
  • 4Department of Physics and Astronomy, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011, USA
  • 5Department of Chemistry, Aarhus University, 8000, Aarhus C, Denmark
  • 6Nordita, KTH Royal Institute of Technology and Stockholm University, Hannes Alfvéns väg 12, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden

  • *lanata@phys.au.dk
PDF

Phys. Rev. B 104, L081103 – Published 5 August, 2021

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.104.L081103

Abstract

We present benchmark calculations of the Anderson lattice model based on the recently developed “ghost Gutzwiller approximation”. Our analysis shows that, in some parameters regimes, the predictions of the standard Gutzwiller approximation can be incorrect by orders of magnitude for this model. We show that this is caused by the inability of this method to describe simultaneously the Mott physics and the hybridization between correlated and itinerant degrees of freedom—whose interplay often governs the metal-insulator transition in real materials. Finally, we show that the ghost Gutzwiller approximation solves this problem, providing us with results in remarkable agreement with dynamical mean-field theory throughout the entire phase diagram, while being much less computationally demanding. We provide an analytical explanation of these findings and discuss their implications within the context of ab-initio computation of strongly correlated matter.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (58)

  1. P. R. C. Kent and G. Kotliar, Toward a predictive theory of correlated materials, Science 361, 348 (2018).
  2. Q. Sun and G.-K.-L. Chan, Quantum embedding theories, Acc. Chem. Res. 49, 2705 (2016).
  3. A. Georges, G. Kotliar, W. Krauth, and M. J. Rozenberg, Dynamical mean-field theory of strongly correlated fermion systems and the limit of infinite dimensions, Rev. Mod. Phys. 68, 13 (1996).
  4. V. Anisimov and Y. Izyumov, Electronic Structure of Strongly Correlated Materials (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2010).
  5. T. A. Maier, M. Jarrell, T. Pruschke, and M. H. Hettler, Quantum cluster theories, Rev. Mod. Phys. 77, 1027 (2005).
  6. G. Kotliar, S. Y. Savrasov, G. Pálsson, and G. Biroli, Cellular Dynamical Mean Field Approach to Strongly Correlated Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 186401 (2001).
  7. A. I. Lichtenstein and M. I. Katsnelson, Antiferromagnetism and d-wave superconductivity in cuprates: A cluster dynamical mean-field theory, Phys. Rev. B 62, R9283 (2000).
  8. M. Potthoff, M. Aichhorn, and C. Dahnken, Variational Cluster Approach to Correlated Electron Systems in Low Dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 206402 (2003).
  9. D. Senechal, D. Perez, and M. Pioro-Ladriere, The Spectral Weight of the Hubbard Model through Cluster Perturbation Theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 522 (2000).
  10. M. Aichhorn, L. Pourovskii, V. Vildosola, M. Ferrero, O. Parcollet, T. Miyake, A. Georges, and S. Biermann, Dynamical mean-field theory within an augmented plane-wave framework: Assessing electronic correlations in the iron pnictide LaFeAsO, Phys. Rev. B 80, 085101 (2009).
  11. G. Kotliar, S. Y. Savrasov, K. Haule, V. S. Oudovenko, O. Parcollet, and C. A. Marianetti, Electronic structure calculations with dynamical mean-field theory, Rev. Mod. Phys. 78, 865 (2006).
  12. K. Held, A. Nekrasov, G. Keller, V. Eyert, N. Blümer, A. K. McMahan, R. T. Scalettar, T. Pruschke, V. I. Anisimov, and D. Vollhardt, Realistic investigations of correlated electron systems with LDA+DMFT, Phys. Stat. Sol. (B) 243, 2599 (2006).
  13. J.-Z. Zhao, J.-N. Zhuang, X.-Y. Deng, Y. Bi, L.-C. Cai, Z. Fang, and X. Dai, Implementation of LDA+DMFT with the pseudo-potential-plane-wave method, Chin. Phys. B 21, 057106 (2012).
  14. L.-Q. Chen, L.-D. Chen, S. V. Kalinin, G. Klimeck, S. K. Kumar, J. Neugebauer, and I. Terasaki, Design and discovery of materials guided by theory and computation, npj Comput. Mater. 1, 15007 (2015).
  15. R. Adler, C.-J. Kang, C.-H. Yee, and G. Kotliar, Correlated materials design: prospects and challenges, Rep. Prog. Phys. 82, 012504 (2018).
  16. M. C. Gutzwiller, Correlation of electrons in a narrow s band, Phys. Rev. 137, A1726 (1965).
  17. X.-Y. Deng, L. Wang, X. Dai, and Z. Fang, Local density approximation combined with Gutzwiller method for correlated electron systems: Formalism and applications, Phys. Rev. B 79, 075114 (2009).
  18. K. M. Ho, J. Schmalian, and C. Z. Wang, Gutzwiller density functional theory for correlated electron systems, Phys. Rev. B 77, 073101 (2008).
  19. T. Schickling, F. Gebhard, and J. Bünemann, Antiferromagnetic Order in Multiband Hubbard Models for Iron Pnictides, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 146402 (2011).
  20. N. Lanatà, Y.-X. Yao, C.-Z. Wang, K.-M. Ho, and G. Kotliar, Phase Diagram and Electronic Structure of Praseodymium and Plutonium, Phys. Rev. X 5, 011008 (2015).
  21. N. Lanatà, H. U. R. Strand, X. Dai, and B. Hellsing, Efficient implementation of the Gutzwiller variational method, Phys. Rev. B 85, 035133 (2012).
  22. J. Bünemann and F. Gebhard, Equivalence of Gutzwiller and slave-boson mean-field theories for multiband Hubbard models, Phys. Rev. B 76, 193104 (2007).
  23. N. Lanatà, P. Barone, and M. Fabrizio, Fermi-surface evolution across the magnetic phase transition in the Kondo lattice model, Phys. Rev. B 78, 155127 (2008).
  24. R. Frésard and P. Wölfle, Unified slave boson representation of spin and charge degrees of freedom for strongly correlated fermi systems, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 06, 685 (1992).
  25. F. Lechermann, A. Georges, G. Kotliar, and O. Parcollet, Rotationally invariant slave-boson formalism and momentum dependence of the quasiparticle weight, Phys. Rev. B 76, 155102 (2007).
  26. N. Lanatà, Y.-X. Yao, X. Deng, V. Dobrosavljević, and G. Kotliar, Slave Boson Theory of Orbital Differentiation with Crystal Field Effects: Application to UO2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 126401 (2017).
  27. G. Knizia and G. K.-L. Chan, Density Matrix Embedding: A Simple Alternative to Dynamical Mean-Field Theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 186404 (2012).
  28. E. Fertitta and G. H. Booth, Rigorous wave function embedding with dynamical fluctuations, Phys. Rev. B 98, 235132 (2018).
  29. T. Ayral, T.-H. Lee, and G. Kotliar, Dynamical mean-field theory, density-matrix embedding theory, and rotationally invariant slave bosons: A unified perspective, Phys. Rev. B 96, 235139 (2017).
  30. T.-H. Lee, T. Ayral, Y.-X. Yao, N. Lanatà, and G. Kotliar, Rotationally invariant slave-boson and density matrix embedding theory: Unified framework and comparative study on the one-dimensional and two-dimensional Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B 99, 115129 (2019).
  31. N. Lanatà, T.-H. Lee, Y.-X. Yao, and V. Dobrosavljević, Emergent Bloch excitations in Mott matter, Phys. Rev. B 96, 195126 (2017).
  32. W. Metzner and D. Vollhardt, Correlated Lattice Fermions in d=∞ Dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 324 (1989).
  33. See Supplemental Material http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/PhysRevB.104.L081103 for the Lagrange formulation of the g-GA in the multiorbital case (including general analytical expression for the g-GA self energy) and details about GA pathology in the narrow-bandwidth limit.
  34. D. Guerci, M. Capone, and M. Fabrizio, Exciton Mott transition revisited, Phys. Rev. Materials 3, 054605 (2019).
  35. J. K. Jain and P. W. Anderson, Beyond the fermi liquid paradigm: Hidden fermi liquids, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106, 9131 (2009).
  36. S. Y. Savrasov, K. Haule, and G. Kotliar, Many-Body Electronic Structure of Americium Metal, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 036404 (2006).
  37. S. Y. Savrasov, V. Oudovenko, K. Haule, D. Villani, and G. Kotliar, Interpolative approach for solving the Anderson impurity model, Phys. Rev. B 71, 115117 (2005).
  38. S. Sakai, M. Civelli, and M. Imada, Hidden-fermion representation of self-energy in pseudogap and superconducting states of the two-dimensional Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B 94, 115130 (2016).
  39. J. Bünemann, F. Gebhard, and R. Thul, Landau-Gutzwiller quasiparticles, Phys. Rev. B 67, 075103 (2003).
  40. P. Werner, A. Comanac, L. de' Medici, M. Troyer, and A. J. Millis, Continuous-Time Solver for Quantum Impurity Models, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 076405 (2006).
  41. E. Gull, A. J. Millis, A. I. Lichtenstein, A. N. Rubtsov, M. Troyer, and P. Werner, Continuous-time Monte Carlo methods for quantum impurity models, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 349 (2011).
  42. K. Haule, Quantum Monte Carlo impurity solver for cluster dynamical mean-field theory and electronic structure calculations with adjustable cluster base, Phys. Rev. B 75, 155113 (2007).
  43. A. Amaricci, L. de' Medici, and M. Capone, Mott transitions with partially filled correlated orbitals, EPL (Europhys. Lett.) 118, 17004 (2017).
  44. J. Zaanen, G. A. Sawatzky, and J. W. Allen, Band Gaps and Electronic Structure of Transition-Metal Compounds, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 418 (1985).
  45. G. Sordi, A. Amaricci, and M. J. Rozenberg, Metal-Insulator Transitions in the Periodic Anderson Model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 196403 (2007).
  46. M. Jarrell and J. E. Gubernatis, Bayesian inference and the analytic continuation of imaginary-time quantum Monte Carlo data, Phys. Rep. 269, 133 (1996).
  47. V. I. Anisimov, A. I. Oteryaev, M. A. Korotin, A. O. Anokhin, and G. Kotliar, First-principles calculations of the electronic structure and spectra of strongly correlated systems: dynamical mean-field theory, J. Phys. Condens. Matter 9, 7359 (1997).
  48. V. I. Anisimov, F. Aryasetiawan, and A. I. Lichtenstein, First-principles calculations of the electronic structure and spectra of strongly correlated systems: the LDA+U method, J. Phys. Condens. Matter 9, 767 (1997).
  49. K. Haule, C.-H. Yee, and K. Kim, Dynamical mean-field theory within the full-potential methods: Electronic structure of CeIrIn5, CeCoIn5, and CeRhIn5, Phys. Rev. B 81, 195107 (2010).
  50. F. Lechermann, A. Georges, A. Poteryaev, S. Biermann, M. Posternak, A. Yamasaki, and O. K. Andersen, Dynamical mean-field theory using Wannier functions: A flexible route to electronic structure calculations of strongly correlated materials, Phys. Rev. B 74, 125120 (2006).
  51. N. Lanatà, T.-H. Lee, Y.-X. Yao, V. Stevanović, and V. Dobrosavljević, Connection between Mott physics and crystal structure in a series of transition metal binary compounds, npj Comput. Mater. 5, 30 (2019).
  52. Y.-X. Yao, F. Zhang, C.-Z. Wang, K.-M. Ho, and P. P. Orth, Gutzwiller hybrid quantum-classical computing approach for correlated materials, Phys. Rev. Research 3, 013184 (2021).
  53. J. R. McClean, J. Romero, R. Babbush, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, The theory of variational hybrid quantum-classical algorithms, New J. Phys. 18, 023023 (2016).
  54. P. J. J. O'Malley, R. Babbush, I. D. Kivlichan, J. Romero, J. R. McClean, R. Barends, J. Kelly, P. Roushan, A. Tranter, N. Ding et al., Scalable Quantum Simulation of Molecular Energies, Phys. Rev. X 6, 031007 (2016).
  55. A. Kandala, A. Mezzacapo, K. Temme, M. Takita, M. Brink, J. M. Chow, and J. M. Gambetta, Hardware-efficient variational quantum eigensolver for small molecules and quantum magnets, Nature (London) 549, 242 (2017).
  56. J. Romero, R. Babbush, J. R. McClean, C. Hempel, P. J. Love, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, Strategies for quantum computing molecular energies using the unitary coupled cluster ansatz, Quantum Sci. Technol. 4, 014008 (2018).
  57. B. Bauer, D. Wecker, A. J. Millis, M. B. Hastings, and M. Troyer, Hybrid Quantum-Classical Approach to Correlated Materials, Phys. Rev. X 6, 031045 (2016).
  58. J. Rogers, T.-H. Lee, S. Pakdel, W. Xu, V. Dobrosavljević, Y.-X. Yao, O. Christiansen, and N. Lanatà, Bypassing the computational bottleneck of quantum-embedding theories for strong electron correlations with machine learning, Phys. Rev. Research 3, 013101 (2021).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. B 104, L081103– Published 5 August, 2021
  • Received 11 June 2021
  • Revised 24 July 2021
  • Accepted 26 July 2021
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by Bibsam.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation