Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:1010.4223 · Physical Review A

Modifying the variational principle in the action-integral-functional derivation of time-dependent density-functional theory

J. Schirmer

Published Nov 11, 2010• 6 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

According to a recent paper by G. Vignale [Phys. Rev. A 77, 062511 (2008)], the problems arising in the original derivation of time-dependent density-functional theory based on the Runge-Gross (RG) action-integral functional (AIF) are because of an incorrect variational principle (VP). This argument and the proposed modification of the VP are critically analyzed. The more fundamental problem, though, is the indefiniteness of the RG AIF. In contrast to a widely held belief the indefiniteness is not eliminated in the variational procedure, which unwittingly is corroborated by Vignale's initial point.

DOI
10.1103/physreva.82.052510

Related papers

Reply to "Comment on 'Modifying the variational principle in the action-integral-functional derivation of time-dependent density functional theory'"

J. Schirmer

In a recent paper [Phys. Rev. A 77, 062511 (2008)], it was advocated to modify the variational principle for the action-integral functional in the Runge-Gross foundation of time-dependent density-functional theory. This was criticised in a subsequent paper [Phys. Rev. A 62, 052510 (2010)] by the present author. In a Comment [Phys. Rev. A 83, 046501 (2011)], it is argued that the criticism is unfounded. This is a response as given to the four specific points raised in the Comment, clarifying and confirming the essence of the original criticism.

arXiv:1105.2718•May 13, 2011•0 citations

Comment on “Modifying the variational principle in the action-integral-functional derivation of time-dependent density-functional theory”

Giovanni Vignale

In a paper recently published in Phys. Rev. A [arXiv:1010.4223], Schirmer has criticized an earlier work of mine [arXiv:0803.2727], as well as the foundations of time-dependent density functional theory. In Ref.[2], I showed that the so-called "causality paradox" - i.e., the failure of the exchange-correlation potential derived from the Runge-Gross time-dependent variational principle to satisfy causality requirements - can be solved by a careful reformulation of that variational principle. Fortunately, the criticism presented in Ref.[1] is based on elementary misunderstandings of the nature of functionals, gauge transformations, and the time-dependent variational principle. In this Comment I wish to point out and clear these misunderstandings.

arXiv:1103.5702•Physical Review A•Apr 27, 2011•5 citations

Action formalism of time-dependent density-functional theory

Martín A. Mosquera

The Runge-Gross [E. Runge and E. K. U. Gross, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 997 (1984)] action functional of time-dependent density-functional theory leads to a well-known causality paradox; that is, a perturbation of the electronic density in the future affects the response of the system in the present. This paradox is known to be caused by an inconsistent application of the Dirac-Frenkel variational principle. In view of the recent solutions to this problem, the action functional employed by Runge and Gross in their formulation of time-dependent density-functional theory is analyzed in the context of the Keldysh contour technique. The time-dependent electronic density and the concept of causality are extended to the contour. We derive a variational equation that obeys causality and relates the exchange-correlation potential with its kernel and the functional derivative of the exchange-correlation action functional with respect to the density. It is shown that the adiabatic local-density approximation is a consistent solution of this equation and that the time-dependent optimized potential method can also be derived from it. The formalism presented here can be used to find new approximation methods for the exchange-correlation potential and to avoid the causality dilemma.

arXiv:1303.5679•Physical Review A•Aug 26, 2013•6 citations

Reexamination of the Runge-Gross action-integral functional

J. Schirmer

The density-based action-integral functional introduced by Runge and Gross [Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 997 (1984)] in their foundation of time-dependent density-functional theory is reexamined. Based on a simple expansion of the original definition, it becomes apparent that the action-integral functional is a trivial construct and, moreover, nonstationary. It cannot be used to establish equations of motion for the time evolution of quantum systems at the density-function level.

arXiv:1203.5052•Physical Review A•Jul 26, 2012•7 citations

N -representability and stationarity in time-dependent density-functional theory

Morrel H. Cohen, Adam Wasserman

To construct an $N$-representable time-dependent density-functional theory, a generalization to the time domain of the Levy-Lieb (LL) constrained-search algorithm is required. That the action is only stationary in the Dirac-Frenkel variational principle eliminates the possibility of basing the search on the action itself. Instead, we use the norm of the partial functional derivative of the action in the Hilbert space of the wave functions in place of the energy of the LL search. The electron densities entering the formalism are $N$-representable, and the resulting universal action functional has a unique stationary point in the density at that corresponding to the solution of the Schr\"odinger equation. The original Runge-Gross (RG) formulation is subsumed within the current formalism. Concerns in the literature about the meaning of the functional derivatives and the internal consistency of the RG formulation are allayed by clarifying the nature of the functional derivatives entering the formalism.

arXiv:cond-mat/0405532•Physical Review A•Mar 31, 2005•8 citations

Critique of the foundations of time-dependent density-functional theory

J. Schirmer, Andreas Dreuw

The general expectation that, in principle, the time-dependent density-functional theory (TDDFT) is an exact formulation of the time evolution of an interacting $N$-electron system is critically reexamined. It is demonstrated that the previous TDDFT foundation, resting on four theorems by Runge and Gross (RG) [Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 997 (1984)], is invalid because undefined phase factors corrupt the RG action integral functionals. Our finding confirms much of a previous analysis by van Leeuwen [Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 15, 1969 (2001)]. To analyze the RG theorems and other aspects of TDDFT, an utmost simplification of the Kohn-Sham (KS) concept has been introduced, in which the ground-state density is obtained from a single KS equation for one spatial (spinless) orbital. The time-dependent (TD) form of this radical Kohn-Sham (rKS) scheme, which has the same validity status as the ordinary KS version, has proved to be a valuable tool for analysis. The rKS concept is used to clarify also the alternative nonvariational formulation of TD KS theory. We argue that it is just a formal theory, allowing one to reproduce but not predict the time development of the exact density of the interacting $N$-electron system. Besides the issue of the formal exactness of TDDFT, it is shown that both the static and time-dependent KS linear response equations neglect the particle-particle ($p$-$p$) and hole-hole ($h$-$h$) matrix elements of the perturbing operator. For a local (multiplicative) operator this does not lead to a loss of information due to a remarkable general property of local operators. Accordingly, no logical inconsistency arises with respect to DFT, because DFT requires any external potential to be local. For a general nonlocal operator the error resulting from the neglected matrix elements is of second order in the electronic repulsion.

arXiv:cond-mat/0602020•Physical Review A•Feb 22, 2007•84 citations
According to a recent paper by G. Vignale [Phys. Rev. A 77, 062511 (2008)], the problems arising in the original derivation of time-dependent density-functional theory based on the Runge-Gross (RG) action-integral functional (AIF) are because of an incorrect variational principle (VP). This argument and the proposed modification of the VP are critically analyzed. The more fundamental problem, though, is the indefiniteness of the RG AIF. In contrast to a widely held belief the indefiniteness is not eliminated in the variational procedure, which unwittingly is corroborated by Vignale's initial point.
In a recent paper [Phys. Rev. A 77, 062511 (2008)], it was advocated to modify the variational principle for the action-integral functional in the Runge-Gross foundation of time-dependent density-functional theory. This was criticised in a subsequent paper [Phys. Rev. A 62, 052510 (2010)] by the present author. In a Comment [Phys. Rev. A 83, 046501 (2011)], it is argued that the criticism is unfounded. This is a response as given to the four specific points raised in the Comment, clarifying and confirming the essence of the original criticism.
In a paper recently published in Phys. Rev. A [arXiv:1010.4223], Schirmer has criticized an earlier work of mine [arXiv:0803.2727], as well as the foundations of time-dependent density functional theory. In Ref.[2], I showed that the so-called "causality paradox" - i.e., the failure of the exchange-correlation potential derived from the Runge-Gross time-dependent variational principle to satisfy causality requirements - can be solved by a careful reformulation of that variational principle. Fortunately, the criticism presented in Ref.[1] is based on elementary misunderstandings of the nature of functionals, gauge transformations, and the time-dependent variational principle. In this Comment I wish to point out and clear these misunderstandings.
The Runge-Gross [E. Runge and E. K. U. Gross, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 997 (1984)] action functional of time-dependent density-functional theory leads to a well-known causality paradox; that is, a perturbation of the electronic density in the future affects the response of the system in the present. This paradox is known to be caused by an inconsistent application of the Dirac-Frenkel variational principle. In view of the recent solutions to this problem, the action functional employed by Runge and Gross in their formulation of time-dependent density-functional theory is analyzed in the context of the Keldysh contour technique. The time-dependent electronic density and the concept of causality are extended to the contour. We derive a variational equation that obeys causality and relates the exchange-correlation potential with its kernel and the functional derivative of the exchange-correlation action functional with respect to the density. It is shown that the adiabatic local-density approximation is a consistent solution of this equation and that the time-dependent optimized potential method can also be derived from it. The formalism presented here can be used to find new approximation methods for the exchange-correlation potential and to avoid the causality dilemma.
To construct an NNN-representable time-dependent density-functional theory, a generalization to the time domain of the Levy-Lieb (LL) constrained-search algorithm is required. That the action is only stationary in the Dirac-Frenkel variational principle eliminates the possibility of basing the search on the action itself. Instead, we use the norm of the partial functional derivative of the action in the Hilbert space of the wave functions in place of the energy of the LL search. The electron densities entering the formalism are NNN-representable, and the resulting universal action functional has a unique stationary point in the density at that corresponding to the solution of the Schr\"odinger equation. The original Runge-Gross (RG) formulation is subsumed within the current formalism. Concerns in the literature about the meaning of the functional derivatives and the internal consistency of the RG formulation are allayed by clarifying the nature of the functional derivatives entering the formalism.
The general expectation that, in principle, the time-dependent density-functional theory (TDDFT) is an exact formulation of the time evolution of an interacting NNN-electron system is critically reexamined. It is demonstrated that the previous TDDFT foundation, resting on four theorems by Runge and Gross (RG) [Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 997 (1984)], is invalid because undefined phase factors corrupt the RG action integral functionals. Our finding confirms much of a previous analysis by van Leeuwen [Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 15, 1969 (2001)]. To analyze the RG theorems and other aspects of TDDFT, an utmost simplification of the Kohn-Sham (KS) concept has been introduced, in which the ground-state density is obtained from a single KS equation for one spatial (spinless) orbital. The time-dependent (TD) form of this radical Kohn-Sham (rKS) scheme, which has the same validity status as the ordinary KS version, has proved to be a valuable tool for analysis. The rKS concept is used to clarify also the alternative nonvariational formulation of TD KS theory. We argue that it is just a formal theory, allowing one to reproduce but not predict the time development of the exact density of the interacting NNN-electron system. Besides the issue of the formal exactness of TDDFT, it is shown that both the static and time-dependent KS linear response equations neglect the particle-particle (ppp-ppp) and hole-hole (hhh-hhh) matrix elements of the perturbing operator. For a local (multiplicative) operator this does not lead to a loss of information due to a remarkable general property of local operators. Accordingly, no logical inconsistency arises with respect to DFT, because DFT requires any external potential to be local. For a general nonlocal operator the error resulting from the neglected matrix elements is of second order in the electronic repulsion.