- 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
  • Open Access

Static treatment of dynamic interactions in the single-orbital Anderson impurity model

Anton Pauli1, Akshat Mishra1, Malte Rösner2, and Erik G. C. P. van Loon1

  • 1NanoLund and Division of Mathematical Physics, Department of Physics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
  • 2Institute for Molecules and Materials, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

PDF

Phys. Rev. B 112, 195101 – Published 3 November, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/kz4l-h4x8

Abstract

Correlated electron physics is intrinsically a multiscale problem, since high-energy electronic states screen the interactions between the correlated electrons close to the Fermi level, thereby reducing the magnitude of the interaction strength and dramatically shortening its range. Thus the handling of screening is an essential ingredient in the first-principles modeling of correlated electron systems. Screening is an intrinsically dynamic process and the corresponding downfolding methods such as the constrained random phase approximation indeed produce a dynamic interaction. However, many low-energy methods require an instantaneous interaction as input, which makes it necessary to map the fully dynamic interaction to an effective instantaneous interaction strength. It is a priori not clear if and when such an effective model can capture the physics of the one with dynamic interaction and how to best perform the mapping. Here, we provide a systematic benchmark relevant to correlated materials, in the form of the Anderson impurity model. Overall, we find that a static approximation can be valid and that the moment-based approach recently proposed by Scott and Booth can be a good tool to find the value of the static interaction. We also identify physical regimes, especially under doping, where an instantaneous interaction cannot capture all of the relevant physics.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (60)

  1. D. N. Basov, R. D. Averitt, and D. Hsieh, Towards properties on demand in quantum materials, Nat. Mater. 16, 1077 (2017).
  2. H. Xu, C.-M. Chung, M. Qin, U. Schollwöck, S. R. White, and S. Zhang, Coexistence of superconductivity with partially filled stripes in the Hubbard model, Science 384, eadh7691 (2024).
  3. F. Aryasetiawan and F. Nilsson, Downfolding Methods in Many-Electron Theory (AIP Publishing LLC, Melville, NY, 2022).
  4. L. Boehnke, F. Nilsson, F. Aryasetiawan, and P. Werner, When strong correlations become weak: Consistent merging of GW and DMFT, Phys. Rev. B 94, 201106(R) (2016).
  5. J. Tomczak, P. Liu, A. Toschi, G. Kresse, and K. Held, Merging GW with DMFT and non-local correlations beyond, Eur. Phys. J.: Spec. Top. 226, 2565 (2017).
  6. S. Choi, A. Kutepov, K. Haule, M. van Schilfgaarde, and G. Kotliar, First-principles treatment of Mott insulators: linearized QSGW+DMFT approach, npj Quantum Mater. 1, 16001 (2016).
  7. 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).
  8. 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).
  9. F. Aryasetiawan, M. Imada, A. Georges, G. Kotliar, S. Biermann, and A. I. Lichtenstein, Frequency-dependent local interactions and low-energy effective models from electronic structure calculations, Phys. Rev. B 70, 195104 (2004).
  10. P. Werner and M. Casula, Dynamical screening in correlated electron systems—from lattice models to realistic materials, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 28, 383001 (2016).
  11. C. Honerkamp, Effective interactions in multiband systems from constrained summations, Phys. Rev. B 85, 195129 (2012).
  12. H. Shinaoka, M. Troyer, and P. Werner, Accuracy of downfolding based on the constrained random-phase approximation, Phys. Rev. B 91, 245156 (2015).
  13. C. Honerkamp, H. Shinaoka, F. F. Assaad, and P. Werner, Limitations of constrained random phase approximation downfolding, Phys. Rev. B 98, 235151 (2018).
  14. E. G. C. P. van Loon, M. Rösner, M. I. Katsnelson, and T. O. Wehling, Random phase approximation for gapped systems: Role of vertex corrections and applicability of the constrained random phase approximation, Phys. Rev. B 104, 045134 (2021).
  15. A. Carta, I. Timrov, S. Beck, and C. Ederer, Bridging constrained random-phase approximation and linear response theory for computing Hubbard parameters, arXiv:2505.03698 [cond-mat.str-el].
  16. G. Rohringer, H. Hafermann, A. Toschi, A. A. Katanin, A. E. Antipov, M. I. Katsnelson, A. I. Lichtenstein, A. N. Rubtsov, and K. Held, Diagrammatic routes to nonlocal correlations beyond dynamical mean field theory, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 025003 (2018).
  17. C. J. C. Scott and G. H. Booth, Rigorous screened interactions for realistic correlated electron systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 076401 (2024).
  18. P. Werner and A. J. Millis, Efficient dynamical mean field simulation of the Holstein-Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 146404 (2007).
  19. 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).
  20. I. R. Reddy, M. Kaltak, and B. Kim, Comparative analysis of methods for calculating Hubbard parameters using cRPA, Phys. Rev. B 111, 195144 (2025).
  21. M. Casula, P. Werner, L. Vaugier, F. Aryasetiawan, T. Miyake, A. J. Millis, and S. Biermann, Low-energy models for correlated materials: Bandwidth renormalization from Coulombic screening, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 126408 (2012).
  22. D. Soriano, A. N. Rudenko, M. I. Katsnelson, and M. Rösner, Environmental screening and ligand-field effects to magnetism in CrI3 monolayer, npj Comput. Mater. 7, 162 (2021).
  23. E. Şaşıoğlu, C. Friedrich, and S. Blügel, Strength of the effective Coulomb interaction at metal and insulator surfaces, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 146401 (2012).
  24. T. Miyake, F. Aryasetiawan, and M. Imada, Ab initio procedure for constructing effective models of correlated materials with entangled band structure, Phys. Rev. B 80, 155134 (2009).
  25. T. O. Wehling, E. Şaşıoğlu, C. Friedrich, A. I. Lichtenstein, M. I. Katsnelson, and S. Blügel, Strength of effective Coulomb interactions in graphene and graphite, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 236805 (2011).
  26. S. Grytsiuk, M. I. Katsnelson, E. G. C. P. v. Loon, and M. Rösner, Nb3Cl8: a prototypical layered Mott-Hubbard insulator, npj Quantum Mater. 9, 8 (2024).
  27. B. Amadon, T. Applencourt, and F. Bruneval, Screened coulomb interaction calculations: cRPA implementation and applications to dynamical screening and self-consistency in uranium dioxide and cerium, Phys. Rev. B 89, 125110 (2014).
  28. Y. Chang, E. G. C. P. van Loon, B. Eskridge, B. Busemeyer, M. A. Morales, C. E. Dreyer, A. J. Millis, S. Zhang, T. O. Wehling, L. K. Wagner, and M. Rösner, Downfolding from ab initio to interacting model Hamiltonians: comprehensive analysis and benchmarking of the DFT+ cRPA approach, npj Comput. Mater. 10, 129 (2024).
  29. B. Lundqvist, Single-particle spectrum of the degenerate electron gas: I. the structure of the spectral weight function, Phys. Kondens. Mater. 6, 193 (1967).
  30. B. Lundqvist, Single-particle spectrum of the degenerate electron gas II. Numerical results for electrons coupled to plasmons, Phys. Kondens. Mater. 6, 206 (1967).
  31. M. S. Hybertsen and S. G. Louie, First-principles theory of quasiparticles: Calculation of band gaps in semiconductors and insulators, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 1418 (1985).
  32. F. Aryasetiawan and O. Gunnarsson, The GW method, Rep. Prog. Phys. 61, 237 (1998).
  33. N. Kavokine, H. Lu, T. Ayral, M. Ferrero, N. Wentzell, and O. Parcollet, CTSEG: A segment picture quantum impurity solver based on TRIQS, JOSS 10, 7425 (2025).
  34. O. Parcollet, M. Ferrero, T. Ayral, H. Hafermann, I. Krivenko, L. Messio, and P. Seth, TRIQS: A toolbox for research on interacting quantum systems, Comput. Phys. Commun. 196, 398 (2015).
  35. H. U. R. Strand, Two-particle response function tool-box (TPRF) for TRIQS, github.com/TRIQS/tprf.
  36. 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).
  37. H. Hafermann, P. Werner, and E. Gull, Efficient implementation of the continuous-time hybridization expansion quantum impurity solver, Comput. Phys. Commun. 184, 1280 (2013).
  38. H. Hafermann, Self-energy and vertex functions from hybridization-expansion continuous-time quantum Monte Carlo for impurity models with retarded interaction, Phys. Rev. B 89, 235128 (2014).
  39. A. Pauli, A. Mishra, M. Rösner, and E. van Loon, Code for “Static treatment of dynamic interactions in the single-orbital Anderson impurity model”, Zenodo (2025), doi:10.5281/zenodo.17272399.
  40. T. Ayral, S. Biermann, and P. Werner, Screening and nonlocal correlations in the extended Hubbard model from self-consistent combined GW and dynamical mean field theory, Phys. Rev. B 87, 125149 (2013).
  41. E. G. C. P. van Loon, A. I. Lichtenstein, M. I. Katsnelson, O. Parcollet, and H. Hafermann, Beyond extended dynamical mean-field theory: Dual boson approach to the two-dimensional extended Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B 90, 235135 (2014).
  42. L. Peters, E. G. C. P. van Loon, A. N. Rubtsov, A. I. Lichtenstein, M. I. Katsnelson, and E. A. Stepanov, Dual boson approach with instantaneous interaction, Phys. Rev. B 100, 165128 (2019).
  43. S. Shubin and S. Wonsovsky, Zur elektronentheorie der metalle, Phys. Z. Sowjetunion 7, 10 (1935).
  44. S. V. Vonsovsky and M. I. Katsnelson, Some types of instabilities in the electron energy spectrum of the polar model of the crystal. II. The criterion of stability of a metallic state, J. Phys. C 12, 2055 (1979).
  45. J. E. Hirsch, Charge-density-wave to spin-density-wave transition in the extended Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 53, 2327 (1984).
  46. E. G. C. P. van Loon, M. Schüler, M. I. Katsnelson, and T. O. Wehling, Capturing nonlocal interaction effects in the Hubbard model: Optimal mappings and limits of applicability, Phys. Rev. B 94, 165141 (2016).
  47. B. Xiao, Y.-Y. He, A. Georges, and S. Zhang, Temperature dependence of spin and charge orders in the doped two-dimensional Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. X 13, 011007 (2023).
  48. E. Kapetanović, G. N. Gigante, M. Schüler, T. O. Wehling, and E. van Loon, Charge correlation, doublon-holon binding and screening in the doped Hubbard model, arXiv:2409.05640 [cond-mat.str-el].
  49. J. M. Tomczak, M. Casula, T. Miyake, F. Aryasetiawan, and S. Biermann, Combined GW and dynamical mean-field theory: Dynamical screening effects in transition metal oxides, Europhys. Lett. 100, 67001 (2012).
  50. A. Al-Eryani, S. Andergassen, and M. M. Scherer, Intertwined fluctuations and isotope effects in the Hubbard-Holstein model on the square lattice from functional renormalization, Phys. Rev. Res. 7, 043052 (2025).
  51. P. S. Cornaglia, H. Ness, and D. R. Grempel, Many-body effects on the transport properties of single-molecule devices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 147201 (2004).
  52. G. Sangiovanni, M. Capone, C. Castellani, and M. Grilli, Electron-phonon interaction close to a Mott transition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 026401 (2005).
  53. R. Bistritzer and A. H. MacDonald, Moiré bands in twisted double-layer graphene, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 108, 12233 (2011).
  54. J. M. Pizarro, M. Rösner, R. Thomale, R. Valentí, and T. O. Wehling, Internal screening and dielectric engineering in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B 100, 161102(R) (2019).
  55. T. Ayral, S. Biermann, P. Werner, and L. Boehnke, Influence of fock exchange in combined many-body perturbation and dynamical mean field theory, Phys. Rev. B 95, 245130 (2017).
  56. Y. in 't Veld, M. Schüler, T. O. Wehling, M. I. Katsnelson, and E. G. C. P. van Loon, Bandwidth renormalization due to the intersite Coulomb interaction, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 31, 465603 (2019).
  57. A. Georges and G. Kotliar, The Hund-metal path to strong electronic correlations, Phys. Today 77(4), 46 (2024).
  58. K. G. Kleiner, S. Joshi, W. Lee, A. Hampel, M. Rösner, C. E. Dreyer, and L. K. Wagner, Quantum Monte Carlo assessment of embedding for a strongly-correlated defect: interplay between mean-field and interactions, arXiv:2505.00845.
  59. H. J. Changlani, H. Zheng, and L. K. Wagner, Density-matrix based determination of low-energy model Hamiltonians from ab initio wavefunctions, J. Chem. Phys. 143, 102814 (2015).
  60. M. Yu, S. Yang, C. Wu, and N. Marom, Machine learning the Hubbard U parameter in DFT+U using Bayesian optimization, npj Comput. Mater. 6, 180 (2020).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. B 112, 195101– Published 3 November, 2025
  • Received 22 July 2025
  • Revised 9 October 2025
  • Accepted 14 October 2025
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