Lecture 14. Density Functional Theory (DFT) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 52
About This Presentation
Title:

Lecture 14. Density Functional Theory (DFT)

Description:

Lecture 14. Density Functional Theory (DFT) References Ratner Ch.11.5, Engel Ch.15.6.3 Lewars Ch.7, Cramer Ch.8, Jensen Ch.6 A bird s-eye view of density functional ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:438
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 53
Provided by: YUN127
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Lecture 14. Density Functional Theory (DFT)


1
Lecture 14. Density Functional Theory (DFT)
  • References
  • Ratner Ch.11.5, Engel Ch.15.6.3
  • Lewars Ch.7, Cramer Ch.8, Jensen Ch.6
  • A birds-eye view of density functional theory
    (Klaus Capelle)
  • http//arxiv.org/PS_cache/cond-mat/pdf/0211/02114
    43.pdf
  • Nobel lecture Electronic structure of matter
    wave functions and density functionals (Walter
    Kohn 1998)
  • http//prola.aps.org/pdf/RMP/v71/i5/p1253_1

2
Postulate 1 of quantum mechanics
  • The state of a quantum mechanical system is
    completely specified by the wavefunction or state
    function that depends on the coordinates
    of the particle(s) and on time.
  • The probability density to find the particle in
    the volume element located at r at
    time t is given by .
    (Born interpretation)
  • The wavefunction must be single-valued,
    continuous, finite, and normalized (the
    probability of find it somewhere is 1).
  • lt??gt

Probability density
3
Wave Function vs. Electron Density
  • Probability density of finding any electron
    within a volume element dr1

N electrons are indistinguishable
Probability density of finding electron 1 with
arbitrary spin within the volume element dr1
while the N-1 electrons have arbitrary positions
and spin
  • Wavefunction
  • Function of 3N variables (r1, r2, , rN)
  • Not observable
  • Function of three spatial variables r
  • Observable (measured by diffraction)
  • Possible to extend to spin-dependent electron
    density

4
Electron Density as the Basic Variable
  • Wavefunction as the center quantity
  • Cannot be probed experimentally
  • Depends on 4N (3N spatial, N spin) variables for
    N-electron system
  • Can we replace the wavefunction by a simpler
    quantity?
  • Electron density ?(r) as the center quantity
  • Depends on 3 spatial variables independent of the
    system size

5
Density suffices.
  • Unique definition of the molecular system
    (through Schrödinger equation)
  • (N, RA, ZA) ? Hamiltonian operator ?
    wavefunction ? properties
  • N number of electrons
  • RA nuclear positions
  • ZA nuclear charges
  • Unique definition of the molecular system
    (through density, too)
  • (N, RA, ZA) ? electron density ? properties
  • ?(r) has maxima (cusps) at RA

6
Electron Density as the Basic Variable 1st
Attempt Thomas-Fermi model (1927)
  • Kinetic energy based on the uniform electron gas
    (Coarse approximation)
  • Classical expression for nuclear-electron and
    electron-electron interaction
  • (Exchange-correlation completely neglected)
  • The energy is given completely in terms of the
    electron density ?(r).
  • The first example of density functional for
    energy.
  • No recourse to the wavefunction.

7
Slaters Approximation of HF Exchange X? method
(1951)
  • Approximation to the non-local exchange
    contribution of the HF scheme
  • Interaction between the charge density and the
    Fermi hole (same spin)
  • Simple approximation to the Fermi hole
    (spherically symmetric)
  • Exchange energy expressed as a density functional
  • Semi-empirical parameter ? (2/31) introduced to
    improve the quality

(from uniform electron gas)
X? or Hartree-Fock-Slater (HFS) method
8
Thomas-Fermi-Dirac Model
  • Combinations of the above two
  • Thomas-Fermi model for kinetic classical
    Coulomb contributions
  • Modified X? model for exchange contribution
  • Pure density functionals
  • NOT very successful in chemical application

9
The Hohenberg-Kohn Theorems (1964)
  • Reference
  • P. Hohenberg and W. Kohn, Phys. Rev. (1964) 136,
    B864
  • http//prola.aps.org/pdf/PR/v136/i3B/pB864_1

10
Hohenberg-Kohn Theorem 1 (1964) Proof of
Existence
11
Hohenberg-Kohn Theorem 1 (1964) Proof of
Existence
The ground state electron density ?(r) in fact
uniquely determines the external potential Vext
and thus the Hamilton operator H and thus all
the properties of the system.
12
Proof
13
Hohenberg-Kohn Functional
  • Since the complete ground state energy is a
    functional of the ground state electron density,
    so must be its individual components.

system-independent, i.e. independent of
(N,RA,ZA)
Hohenberg-Kohn functional
14
Hohenberg-Kohn Functional Holy Grail of DFT
15
Finding Unknown Functional Major Challenge in DFT
  • The explicit form of the functionals lies
    completely in the dark.
  • Finding explicit forms for the unknown
    functionals represent the major challenge in
    DFT.

Kinetic energy
Non-classical contribution Self-interaction,
exchange, correlation
Classical coulomb interaction
16
Hohenberg-Kohn Theorem 2 (1964) Variational
Principle
  • FHK? delivers the lowest energy if and only
    if the input density
  • is the true ground state density ?0.
  • Limited only to the ground state energy. No
    excited state information!

Proof
from the variational principle of wavefunction
theory
17
Variational Principle in DFT Levys Constrained
Search (1979)
  • Use the variation principle in wavefunction
    theory (Chapter 1)
  • Do it in two separate steps
  • Search over the subset of all the antisymmetric
    wavefunctions ?X that yield a particular density
    ?X upon quadrature ? Identify ?Xmin which
    delivers the lowest energy EX for the given
    density ?X
  • Search over all densities ?? (?A,B,,X,) ?
    Identify the density ?? for which the
    wavefunction ??min from (Step 1) delivers the
    lowest energy of all.

Search over all allowed, antisymmetric N-electron
wavefunction
18
Variational Principle in DFT
  • Determined simply by the density
  • Independent of the wavefunction
  • The same for all the wavefunctions
  • integrating to a particular density

Universal functional
19
HK Theorem in Real Life? Pragmatic Point of View
  • The variational principle applies to the exact
    functional only.
  • The true functional is not available.
  • We use an approximation for F?.
  • The variational principle in DFT does not hold
    any more in real life.
  • The energies obtained from an approximate
    density functional theory can be lower than the
    exact ones!
  • Offers no solution to practical considerations.
    Only of theoretical value.

20
The Kohn-Sham Approach (1965)
  • Reference
  • W. Kohn and L.J. Sham, Phys. Rev. (1965) 140,
    A1133
  • http//prola.aps.org/abstract/PR/v140/i4A/pA1133_
    1

21
Implement Hohenberg-Kohn Theorems Thomas-Fermi?
  • Hohenberg-Kohn theorems
  • Hohenberg-Kohn universal functional
  • Thomas-Fermi(-Dirac) model for kinetic energy
    fails miserably
  • No molecular system is stable with respect to
    its fragments!

Classical coulomb known
Explicit forms remain a mystery.
(from uniform electron gas)
22
Hartree-Fock, a Single-Particle Approach Better
than TF
Section IV.C, Nobel lecture Electronic structure
of matter wave functions and density
functionals (Walter Kohn 1998)
23
Better Model for the Kinetic Energy Orbitals
Non-Interacting Reference System (HF for DFT?)
Section IV.C, Nobel lecture Electronic structure
of matter wave functions and density
functionals (Walter Kohn 1998)
  • A single Slater determinant constructed from N
    spin orbitals (HF scheme)
  • Approximation to the true N-electron wavefunction
  • Exact wavefunction of a fictitious system of N
    non-interacting electrons (fermions) under an
    effective potential VHF
  • The kinetic energy is exactly expressed as
  • Use this expression in order to compute the major
    fraction of the kinetic energy of the interacting
    system at hand

24
Non-Interacting Reference System Kohn-Sham
Orbital
  • Hamiltonian with an effective local potential Vs
    (no e-e interaction)
  • The ground state wavefunction (Slater
    determinant)
  • One-electron Kohn-Sham orbitals determined by
  • with the one-electron Kohn-Sham operator
  • satisfy

Vs chosen to satisfy the density condition
Ground state density of the real target system
of interacting electrons
25
The Kohn-Sham One-Electron Equations
  • If we are not able to accurately determine the
    kinetic energy through an explicit functional, we
    should be a bit less ambitious and
  • concentrate on computing as much as we can of the
    true kinetic energy exactly and then
  • deal with the remainder in an approximate manner.
  • Non-interacting reference system with the same
    density as the real one
  • Exchange-Correlation energy (Junkyard of all
    the unknowns)

Kohn-Sham orbitals
26
The Kohn-Sham Equations. Vs and SCF
  • Energy expression
  • Variational principle (minimize E under the
    constraint )

Density-based
Wavefunction -based
only term unknown
iterative solution SCF
where
27
The Kohn-Sham Approach Wave Function is Back!
A birds-eye view of density functional theory
(Klaus Capelle), Section 4 http//arxiv.org/PS_cac
he/cond-mat/pdf/0211/0211443.pdf
28
The Kohn-Sham Equation is in principle exact!
  • Hartree-Fock
  • By using a single Slater determinant which cant
    be the true wavefunction, the approximation is
    introduced right from the start
  • Kohn-Sham
  • If the exact forms of EXC and VXC were known
    (which is not the case), it would lead to the
    exact energy.
  • Approximation only enters when we decide on the
    explicit form of the unknown functional, EXC and
    VXC.
  • The central goal is to find better approximations
    to those exchange-correlation functionals.

Section IV.C, Nobel lecture Electronic structure
of matter wave functions and density
functionals (Walter Kohn 1998)
29
The Kohn-Sham Procedure I
where
30
The Kohn-Sham Procedure II
31
The Kohn-Sham Procedure III
32
The Exchange-Correlation Energy Hartree-Fock
vs. Kohn-Sham
  • Hatree-Fock
  • Kohn-Sham

33
The Quest for Approximate Exchange-Correlation
(XC) Functionals
  • The Kohn-Sham approach allows an exact treatment
    of most of the contributions to the electronic
    energy.
  • All remaining unknown parts are collective folded
    into the junkyard exchange-correlation
    functional (EXC).
  • The Kohn-Sham approach makes sense only if EXC is
    known exactly, which is unfortunately not the
    case.
  • The quest for finding better and better XC
    functionals (EXC) is at the very heart of the
    density functional theory.

34
Is There a Systematic Strategy?
  • Conventional wavefunction theory
  • The results solely depends on the choice of the
    approximate wavefunction.
  • The true wavefunction can be constructed by
  • Full configuration interaction (infinite number
    of Slater determinants)
  • Complete (infinite) basis set expansion
  • Never realized just because its too complicated
    to be ever solved,
  • but we know how it can be improved step by step
    in a systematic manner
  • Density functional theory
  • The explicit form of the exact functional is a
    total mystery.
  • We dont know how to approach toward the exact
    functional.
  • There is no systematic way to improve approximate
    functionals.
  • However, there are a few physical constraints for
    a reasonable functional.

35
The Local Density Approximation (LDA)
  • Model
  • Hypothetical homogeneous, uniform electron gas
  • Model of an idealized simple metal with a
    perfect crystal
  • (the positive cores are smeared out to a
    uniform background charge)
  • Far from realistic situation (atom,molecule)
    with rapidly varying density
  • The only system for which we know EXC exactly
  • (Slater or Dirac exchange functional in
    Thomas-Fermi-Dirac model)

36
The Local Density Approximation (LDA)
  • Exchange
  • Correlation
  • From numerical simulations,

(VWN)
37
(No Transcript)
38
Gradient Expansion Approximation (GEA)
  • LDA not sufficient for chemical accuracy,
    solid-state application only
  • includes only ?(r), the first term of
    Taylor expansion
  • In order to account for the non-homogeneity,
  • lets supplement with the second term, ??(r)
    (gradient)
  • Works when the density is not uniform but very
    slowly varying
  • Does not perform well (Even worse than LDA)
  • ? Violates basic requirements of true holes (sum
    rules, non-positiveness)
  • (LDA meets those requirements.)

39
Generalized Gradient Approximation (GGA)
  • Contains the gradients of the charge density and
    the hole constraints
  • Enforce the restrictions valid for the true holes
  • When its not negative, just set it to zero.
  • Truncate the holes to satisfy the correct sum
    rules.

Reduced density gradient of spin ? Local
inhomogeneity parameter
40
Exact Exchange Approach?
  • Exchange contribution is bigger than correlation
    contribution.
  • Exchange energy of a Slater determinant can be
    calculated exactly (HF).
  • Exact HF exchange approximate functionals only
    for correlation

  • (parts missing in HF)
  • Good for atoms, Bad for molecules (32 kcal/mol G2
    error) HF 78 kcal/mol
  • Why?
  • The resulting total hole has the wrong
    characteristics (not localized).
  • Local Slater exchange from uniform electron gas
    seems a better model.

This division is artificial anyway.
delocalized (due to a single Slater determinant)
local model functional (should be delocalized
to compensate Ex)
41
Slaters Approximation of HF Exchange X? method
(1951)
  • Approximation to the non-local exchange
    contribution of the HF scheme
  • Interaction between the charge density and the
    Fermi hole (same spin)
  • Simple approximation to the Fermi hole
    (spherically symmetric)
  • Exchange energy expressed as a density functional
  • Semi-empirical parameter ? (2/31) introduced to
    improve the quality

(from uniform electron gas)
X? or Hartree-Fock-Slater (HFS) method
42
Beckes Hybrid Functionals Adiabatic Connection
where
Non-interacting, Exchange only (of a Slater
determinant), Exact
1
Fully-interacting, Unknown, Approximated with XC
functionals
Empirical Fit (Becke93) (2-3 kcal/mol G2 error)
Half-and-half (Becke93) (6.5 kcal/mol G2 error)
B3LYP
43
(No Transcript)
44
Summary XC Functionals
  • LDA Good structural properties, Fails in
    energies with overbinding
  • GGA (BP86, BLYP, BPW91, PBE) Good energetics (lt
    5 kcal/mol wrt G2)
  • Hybrid (B3LYP) The most satisfactory results

45
Self-Interaction Problem
  • Consider a one-electron system (e.g. H?)
  • Theres absolutely no electron-electron
    interaction.
  • The general KS equation should still hold.
  • Classical electron repulsion
  • To remove this wrong self-interaction error, we
    must demand
  • None of the current approximate XC functions
    (which are set up independent of J?) is
    self-interaction free.

? 0 even for one-electron system
(naturally taken care of in HF)
46
Self-Interaction in HF
  • Coulomb term J when i j (Coulomb interaction
    with oneself)
  • Beautifully cancelled by exchange term K in HF
    scheme
  • HF scheme is free of self-interaction errors.

? 0
0
47
Self-Interaction Error J?EXC?
48
HK Theorem in Real Life?
  • The variational principle applies to the exact
    functional only.
  • The true functional is not available.
  • We use an approximation for F?.
  • The variational principle in DFT does not hold
    any more in real life.
  • The energies obtained from an approximate
    density functional theory can be lower than the
    exact ones!

49
(No Transcript)
50
(No Transcript)
51
(No Transcript)
52
(No Transcript)
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com