pdf, 9 MiB - Infoscience - EPFL
pdf, 9 MiB - Infoscience - EPFL
pdf, 9 MiB - Infoscience - EPFL
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
34 CHAPTER 2. NUMERICAL METHODS<br />
Since P (α) is a positive function, the sum can be sampled by Monte Carlo calculations<br />
and no spurious sign problem occurs. The probability of a transition<br />
from state X toanewstateX ′ is given by:<br />
(<br />
)<br />
P (X → X ′ )=min 1, |det(A(X′ ))| 2<br />
|det(A(X))| 2 (2.20)<br />
Therefore, during a simulation the main task consists in calculating ratios of<br />
determinants. Although the brute force calculation of a determinant scales like<br />
N 3 numerical operations, we can reduce it to N operations [42] by considering<br />
optimized formulae that allow to compute directly ratios of determinants of two<br />
matrices A ′ /A, where the two matrices A and A ′ differ only the column j:<br />
w j = det(A′ )<br />
det(A) = ∑ k<br />
A −1<br />
j,k v k (2.21)<br />
where v is the column j of the new matrix A ′ . Similar formula can be obtained<br />
when several lines and columns are updated at the same time in the new matrix<br />
A ′ (for further details see ref. [45]). However, the formula (2.21) involves the<br />
inverse of the matrix A. The matrix A −1 can be updated when a set of rows<br />
and/or columns are changed in the matrix A 1 each time that a Monte Carlo<br />
move is accepted, and the update can be done in N 2 numerical operation [42].<br />
In the simple implementation of the Metropolis algorithm, the moves are often<br />
rejected and therefore the formula 2.21 is the bottleneck of the simulation. A<br />
even much improved algorithm, that updates directly the weights w j and does<br />
not compute the inverse of the matrix A, is currently used by Sandro Sorella and<br />
collaborators. This latter algorithm computes the weight w j in a single operation.<br />
However, the implementation of such an algorithm is much more involved and is<br />
beyond the scope of this dissertation.<br />
2.1.1 Degenerate open shell<br />
As discussed in the previous section, the variational wavefunction is built by<br />
piling the quasi-particle states up to the Fermi energy, in the case of a tightbinding<br />
wavefunction, or up to the chemical potential µ when the BCS pairing<br />
is considered. When the energy of the single-particle state is non-degenerate<br />
the resulting wavefunction is well defined. However, the wavefunction becomes<br />
ambiguous when the energies are degenerate. This happens in finite size clusters,<br />
due to the symmetry of the lattice: The k points are lying on shells of same energy.<br />
This gives artificial degeneracies related to the different filling possibilities.<br />
1 The hopping of one particle involves a change of row or a column in A, andtheswapof<br />
an up and down particles involves the change of both a row and a column in A.