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:cond-mat/9810173 · Springer eBooks

Phase Separation in the 2D Hubbard Model : A Challenging Application of Fixed-Node QMC

Giovanni B. Bachelet, Andrea C. Cosentini

Published Jan 1, 1999• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF
DOI
10.1007/978-94-011-4792-7_14

Related papers

High Precision QMC Study of the 2D Hubbard Model

Christopher N. Varney, Simone Chiesa, Richard T. Scalettar

Bulletin of the American Physical Society•Mar 17, 2009•0 citations

Controlled evidence for phase separation in the fermionic 2D Hubbard model

Fedor vSimkovic, Evgeny Kozik, Boris V. Svistunov +2 more

Bulletin of the American Physical Society•Mar 13, 2017•0 citations

Fixed-node Monte Carlo study of the two-dimensional Hubbard model

Guozhong An, J. M. J. van Leeuwen

Abstract This study extended the fixed-node QMC method to a lattice model for hopping fermions using Green’s function techniques. In general, the modifications of the procedures for continuous systems to adapt them to a lattice system were minor, and there appeared to be no surprises. Applications were made to the two-dimensional Hubbard model with different on-site interactions, lattice dimensions, boundary conditions, node specifications, and trial wavefunctions for importance sampling. Results were compared with those of Hartree-Fock and variational QMC calculations. For the HF calculations with zero interaction, the exact solutions are known, and the Green’s function QMC results agreed with those within statistical error. Trial wavefunctions specifying the nodes were obtained directly as those of HF determinantal solutions for zero interaction, or as variationally optimized determinantal functions with correlation terms. The procedure for fixed nodes was to eliminate walkers crossing the boundaries of a nodal region, a procedure not quite correct, but probably a reasonable approximation. The results in all cases were consistent with the HF and variational QMC calculations, giving lower energies than either for nonzero interaction energies. The existence of a domain-wall phase suggested by the HF and variational QMC results was confirmed by the fixed-node Green’s function results. It was noted that the fixed-node method would be applicable to systems other than the Hubbard model.

•Jun 18, 2007•0 citations

Phase separation in the two-dimensional Hubbard model: A fixed-node quantum Monte Carlo study

Andrea C. Cosentini, Massimo Capone, Leonardo Guidoni +1 more

Fixed-node Green's-function Monte Carlo calculations have been performed for very large 16\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}16 two-dimensional Hubbard lattices, large interaction strengths $U=10,20,$ and $40$, and many $(15\ensuremath{\sim}20)$ densities between empty and half-filling. The nodes were fixed by a simple Slater-Gutzwiller trial wave function. For each value of U we obtained a sequence of ground-state energies which is consistent with the possibility of a phase separation close to half-filling, with a hole density in the hole-rich phase which is a decreasing function of $U$. The energies suffer, however, from a fixed-node bias: more accurate nodes are needed to confirm this picture. Our extensive numerical results and their test against size, shell, shape, and boundary-condition effects also suggest that phase separation is quite a delicate issue, on which simulations based on smaller lattices than considered here are unlikely to give reliable predictions.

arXiv:cond-mat/9801299•Physical review. B, Condensed matter•Dec 1, 1998•35 citations

Phase separation in the 1-D extended Hubbard model

Hua Lin, Eduardo R. Gagliano, David K Campbell

Physica C Superconductivity•Aug 1, 1997•6 citations

Phase separation in the two-dimensional Hubbard model: A fixed-node quantum Monte Carlo study

Andrea C. Cosentini, Guidoni L, Giovanni B. Bachelet +1 more

Fixed-node Green's-function Monte Carlo calculations have been performed for very large 16x16 two-dimensional Hubbard lattices, large interaction strengths U=10,20, and 40, and many (15 similar to 20) densities between empty and half-filling. The nodes were fixed by a simple Slater-Gutzwiller trial wave function. For each value of U we obtained a sequence of ground-state energies which is consistent with the possibility of a phase separation close to half-filling, with a hole density in the hole-rich phase which is a decreasing function of U. The energies suffer, however, from a fixed-node bias: more accurate nodes are needed to confirm this picture. Our extensive numerical results and their test against size, shell, shape, and boundary-condition effects also suggest that phase separation is quite a delicate issue, on which simulations based on smaller lattices than considered here are unlikely to give reliable predictions. RI Capone, Massimo/A-7762-2008; Guidoni, Leonardo/G-3759-2011

•Jan 1, 1998•0 citations
Abstract This study extended the fixed-node QMC method to a lattice model for hopping fermions using Green’s function techniques. In general, the modifications of the procedures for continuous systems to adapt them to a lattice system were minor, and there appeared to be no surprises. Applications were made to the two-dimensional Hubbard model with different on-site interactions, lattice dimensions, boundary conditions, node specifications, and trial wavefunctions for importance sampling. Results were compared with those of Hartree-Fock and variational QMC calculations. For the HF calculations with zero interaction, the exact solutions are known, and the Green’s function QMC results agreed with those within statistical error. Trial wavefunctions specifying the nodes were obtained directly as those of HF determinantal solutions for zero interaction, or as variationally optimized determinantal functions with correlation terms. The procedure for fixed nodes was to eliminate walkers crossing the boundaries of a nodal region, a procedure not quite correct, but probably a reasonable approximation. The results in all cases were consistent with the HF and variational QMC calculations, giving lower energies than either for nonzero interaction energies. The existence of a domain-wall phase suggested by the HF and variational QMC results was confirmed by the fixed-node Green’s function results. It was noted that the fixed-node method would be applicable to systems other than the Hubbard model.
Fixed-node Green's-function Monte Carlo calculations have been performed for very large 16\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}16 two-dimensional Hubbard lattices, large interaction strengths U=10,20,U=10,20,U=10,20, and 404040, and many $(15\ensuremath{\sim}20)$ densities between empty and half-filling. The nodes were fixed by a simple Slater-Gutzwiller trial wave function. For each value of U we obtained a sequence of ground-state energies which is consistent with the possibility of a phase separation close to half-filling, with a hole density in the hole-rich phase which is a decreasing function of UUU. The energies suffer, however, from a fixed-node bias: more accurate nodes are needed to confirm this picture. Our extensive numerical results and their test against size, shell, shape, and boundary-condition effects also suggest that phase separation is quite a delicate issue, on which simulations based on smaller lattices than considered here are unlikely to give reliable predictions.
Fixed-node Green's-function Monte Carlo calculations have been performed for very large 16x16 two-dimensional Hubbard lattices, large interaction strengths U=10,20, and 40, and many (15 similar to 20) densities between empty and half-filling. The nodes were fixed by a simple Slater-Gutzwiller trial wave function. For each value of U we obtained a sequence of ground-state energies which is consistent with the possibility of a phase separation close to half-filling, with a hole density in the hole-rich phase which is a decreasing function of U. The energies suffer, however, from a fixed-node bias: more accurate nodes are needed to confirm this picture. Our extensive numerical results and their test against size, shell, shape, and boundary-condition effects also suggest that phase separation is quite a delicate issue, on which simulations based on smaller lattices than considered here are unlikely to give reliable predictions. RI Capone, Massimo/A-7762-2008; Guidoni, Leonardo/G-3759-2011