Jump to content

Requests for technical support from the VASP team should be posted in the VASP Forum.

Category:Strongly correlated electrons: Difference between revisions

From VASP Wiki
Tal (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Csheldon (talk | contribs)
 
(44 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
[[File:Ni_d_s_bands.png|200px|thumb|Band structure of a typical strongly correlated system - Ni]]
[[File:Ni_d_s_bands.png|200px|thumb|Band structure of a typical strongly correlated system - Ni]]
Strongly correlated materials are systems in which electron-electron interactions play a dominant role and cannot be adequately described by independent-particle approximations such as standard DFT. These systems typically include elements with $d$ and $f$ electrons which are localized, and correlation effects lead to phenomena such as metal-insulator transitions, magnetism, and unconventional superconductivity.
'''Strongly correlated materials''' are systems in which electron-electron interactions play a dominant role and cannot be adequately described by independent-particle approximations such as standard DFT {{Cite|martin:book:2016}}. These systems typically include elements with partially filled <math>d</math> and <math>f</math> electron orbitals which are localized. Correlation effects lead to phenomena such as metal-insulator transitions, magnetism, and unconventional superconductivity.
To model such systems, several extensions of DFT have been developed.  
To model such systems, several extensions of DFT have been developed. Below, you find methods relevant in the context of strongly correlated electrons. Many rely on estimating the on-site Coulomb interaction U.


== DFT+U ==
== Estimating the on-site Coulomb interaction U ==
DFT+U is the simplest and the most computationally efficient approach to treat strong correlations within electronic structure calculations. Within this approach, standard DFT is augmented with an on-site Hubbard interaction term $U$ that explicitly penalizes fractional occupation of localized orbitals. The Hubbard interaction is typically applied to $d$ or $f$ states.
 
{{NB|mind|It is not currently possible to apply $U$ to both $d$ and $f$ states of the same atom}}
[[DFT+U]] and [[DFT+DMFT calculations]] rely on the on-site Coulomb interaction U as an input parameter. There are some strategies to obtain a value for U:
\begin{equation}
 
E=E_{DFT}+\sum_I\left[\frac{U^I}{2} \sum_{m, \sigma \neq m^{\prime}, \sigma^{\prime}} n_m^{I \sigma} n_{m^{\prime}}^{I \sigma^{\prime}}-\frac{U^I}{2} n^I\left(n^I-1\right)\right],
* Estimate U based on available experimental results. This approach is not fully ab initio, yet it can be the most pragmatic strategy. Here one treats the effective on-site interaction <math>U</math> as an adjustable parameter, tuning it to reproduce selected experimental observables such as the band gap, magnetic moments, or lattice parameters. For instance, one may perform [[volume relaxation|volume relaxations]] at different U values to obtain volume as a function of U, $v(U)$. Knowing the experimental value for the volume, a linear fit of $v(U)$ can give an estimate for a suitable U value. This approach relies on the fact that the expansion or localization of the strongly correlated d or f electron orbitals drives the ions to relax at a certain distance. One then use the fixed U value to obtain other quantities like band gap, optical properties. Another approach can be to fit the optical gap to ensure the band-structure properties resemble the experiment, which is crucial for, e.g., binding energies or excited states calculations.
\end{equation}
 
where the first term is the standard DFT energy, the second term is the Hubbard on-site interaction and the third term accounts for the double counting. The on-site interaction is described by $U^I$ and $n_m^{I\sigma}$ are occupation numbers that are defined as projections of occupied Kohn-Sham orbitals on the states of a localized basis set.
* Linear-response calculation of <math>U</math> ({{TAG|LDAUTYPE|3}}). Within this approach the effective interaction <math>U</math> can be determined via the linear response approach {{cite|cococcioni:2005}}
:<math display="block">
U=\chi^{-1}-\chi_0^{-1} \approx\left(\frac{\partial N_I^{\mathrm{SCF}}}{\partial V_I}\right)^{-1}-\left(\frac{\partial N_I^{\mathrm{NSCF}}}{\partial V_I}\right)^{-1}.
</math>
:The shortcoming of this method is that the effective interaction accounts for the response due to all electrons including the target states (localized <math>d</math> or <math>f</math> orbitals), thus leading to double counting in the derived effective potential U.
 
:* Workflow for [https://vasp.at/wiki/Calculate_U_for_LSDA%2BU NiO Calculate U for LSDA+U calculations].


VASP provides the following approaches to include the Hubbard corrections:
* [[Constrained–random-phase–approximation formalism|Constrained random phase approximation (cRPA)]] is a first-principles method to estimate U. cRPA allows to separate the screening originating from the target states from the rest of the system and to determine the effective interaction <math>U</math> that is free of double counting.


* {{TAG|LDAUTYPE}}=1: The rotationally invariant formulation of the Hubbard correction that eliminates the dependence on the specific choice of the localized basis set.
:The response function without the contribution of the target states or constrained polarizability <math>\chi_c</math> is calculated by explicitly removing the response in the target space <math>\chi_d</math> from the total response function:


* {{TAG|LDAUTYPE}}=4: The same approach as {{TAG|LDAUTYPE}}=1 but uses spin-averaged expression that's simpler and assumes an average spin configuration.
:<math display="block">\chi_c(\omega) = \chi(\omega) - \chi_d(\omega)</math>.


* {{TAG|LDAUTYPE}}=2: The simplified approach which is also rotationally invariant but uses isotropic effective interaction $U^I_{eff}=U^I-J^I$ {{cite|dudarev:prb:98}}. This approach neglects the anisotropy of the orbitals and thus the on-site interaction depends on the occupations but not the orbitals themselves.
:[[Constrained–random-phase–approximation formalism#Effective Coulomb kernel in constrained random-phase approximation|VASP provides several approaches for calculating <math>\chi_d</math>]]


A common approach is to treat the effective on-site interaction $U$ as an adjustable parameter, tuning it to reproduce selected experimental observables such as the band gap, magnetic moments, or lattice parameters. Alternatively, fully ''ab initio'' schemes exist that determine the Hubbard interaction directly from first principles, avoiding empirical fitting.
:* Lecture on the {{Video|strong_corr:merzuk:2026|constrained random-phase approximation}} (cRPA).
:* Tutorial for {{Tutorial|strong_corr:part1|cRPA of NiO}}.
:* Workflow for [[CRPA of SrVO3]].


* {{TAG|LDAUTYPE}}=3: Linear-response calculation of $U$. Within this approach the effective interaction $U$ can be determined via the linear response approach {{cite|cococcioni:2005}}
== DFT+U ==
\begin{equation}
[[:Category:DFT+U|DFT+U]] is the simplest and the most computationally efficient approach to treat strong correlations within electronic structure calculations. Within this approach, standard DFT is augmented with an on-site [[LDAU|Hubbard interaction term <math>U</math>]] that explicitly penalizes fractional occupation of localized orbitals. The Hubbard interaction is typically applied to <math>d</math> or <math>f</math> states.
U=\chi^{-1}-\chi_0^{-1} \approx\left(\frac{\partial N_I^{\mathrm{SCF}}}{\partial V_I}\right)^{-1}-\left(\frac{\partial N_I^{\mathrm{NSCF}}}{\partial V_I}\right)^{-1}.
{{NB|mind|It is not currently possible to apply <math>U</math> to both <math>d</math> and <math>f</math> states of the same atom}}
\end{equation}
The total energy within DFT+U can be written as
The shortcoming of this method is that the effective interaction accounts for the response due to all electrons including the target states (localized $d$ or $f$ orbitals), thus leading to double counting
in the derived effective potential U.


== Constrained Random Phase Approximation (cRPA) ==
<math display="block">
[[Constrained–random-phase–approximation formalism|cRPA]] is a first-principles method used to compute the effective interaction parameters for the DFT+U  or DMFT calculations.
E=E_{DFT}+\sum_I\left[\frac{U^I}{2} \sum_{m, \sigma \neq m^{\prime}, \sigma^{\prime}} n_m^{I \sigma} n_{m^{\prime}}^{I \sigma^{\prime}}-\frac{U^I}{2} n^I\left(n^I-1\right)\right],
cRPA allows to separate the screening originating from the target states from the rest of the system and to determine the effective interaction $U$ that is free of double counting.
</math>


The response function without the contribution of the target states or constrained polarizability $\chi_c$ is calculated by explicitly removing the response in the target space $\chi_d$ from the total response function:  
where the first term is the standard DFT energy, the second term is the Hubbard on-site interaction and the third term accounts for the double counting. The on-site interaction is described by <math>U^I</math> and <math>n_m^{I\sigma}</math> are occupation numbers that are defined as projections of occupied Kohn-Sham orbitals on the states of a localized basis set.
$\chi_c(\omega) = \chi(\omega) - \chi_d(\omega)$.
<!--
* Lecture on the {{Video|strong_corr:alex:2026|DFT+U}}.-->
* Tutorial for {{Tutorial|strong_corr:part2|DFT+U on NiO}}.
* Tutorial for {{Tutorial|strong_corr:part3|GW and DFT+U on NiO}}.
* Tutorial for {{Tutorial|bulk:e09|NiO DFT+U calculations}}.
* Tutorial for {{Tutorial|magnetism:e03|antiferromagnetic NiO}}.
* Tutorial for {{Tutorial|magnetism:e04|LSDA+U structure relaxation of NiO}}.
* Tutorial for {{Tutorial|magnetism:e05|Heisenberg model for NiO using DFT+U}}.
* Tutorial for {{Tutorial|magnetism:e07|magnetic anisotropy in FeO}}.


[[Constrained–random-phase–approximation formalism#Effective Coulomb kernel in constrained random-phase approximation|VASP provides several approaches for calculating $\chi_d$]]
== Dynamical mean-field theory (DMFT) ==
In [[DFT+DMFT calculations]], DMFT{{cite|kotliar:rmp:2006}} augments the DFT calculation with an additional local correlated subproblem — typically a specific <math>d</math>- or <math>f</math>-shell. The key idea is to map the full lattice problem onto a quantum impurity model: a single correlated site embedded in a self-consistently determined effective bath representing the rest of the lattice. DMFT can be discussed using the [[GW_approximation_of_Hedin%27s_equations#Green's_functions|Green's function formalism]] also used in the context of [[many-body perturbation theory]]. The main quantity is the electronic self-energy. Within DMFT it is defined as the sum of all one-particle irreducible diagrams. The central approximation is that the self-energy is frequency-dependent but momentum-independent, i.e., purely local. [[DFT+DMFT calculations]] capture many-body effects beyond the reach of DFT+U, such as quasiparticle mass renormalization, Hubbard bands, and the Mott metal–insulator transition. The interaction parameter entering DMFT can be determined as discussed in [[#Estimating the on-site Coulomb interaction U|estimating the on-site Coulomb interaction U]].


== Dynamical Mean-Field Theory (DMFT) ==
* Lecture on {{Video|strong_corr:alex:2026|DFT+U and dynamical mean-field theory}}.
DMFT is an advanced extension of DFT ([[DFT+DMFT calculations|DFT+DMFT]]) that provides an accurate treatment of strongly correlated materials including dynamical effects, which are fully neglected in DFT+U {{cite|kotliar:rmp:2006}}. Within DMFT a lattice problem is mapped onto a self-consistent quantum impurity model by embedding a single correlated site in an effective bath that represents the rest of the system, and the key approximation is that the self-energy is local (frequency-dependent but momentum-independent). DMFT constitutes a state-of-the-art approach for the accurate description of strongly correlated systems, capturing essential many-body effects such as quasiparticle renormalization, Hubbard bands, and Mott metal–insulator transitions. DMFT can be used in combination with cRPA, where cRPA is used as a preliminary step to determine the effective screening $U(\omega)$ without the contribution from the target space to avoid double-counting in the subsequent calculation of the self-energy within DMFT.
* Tutorial for {{Tutorial|strong_corr:part2|DMFT on NiO}}.
* Workflow for [[DFT%2BDMFT_calculations|NiO DFT+DMFT calculations]].


== Other methods ==
== Other methods ==
There are other methods that are not specialized for strongly correlated system but nevertheless have been shown to improve the description of the electronic structure of the strongly correlated systems.  
There are other methods that, while not specifically designed for strongly correlated systems, have nonetheless been demonstrated to improve their description and electronic structure.


=== Hybrid functionals ===
=== Hybrid functionals ===
By including a fraction of exact exchange, the hybrid functional approach can reduce the self-interaction error in DFT, which is required to improve the description of the physics of strong correlations {{cite|Silva2007}}{{cite|liu2019assessing}}.
By incorporating a fraction of exact exchange, [[:Category:Hybrid functionals|hybrid functionals]] partially mitigate the self-interaction error inherent to standard DFT. This reduction of the self-interaction error has been shown to yield an improved description of strongly correlated systems {{cite|Silva2007}}{{cite|liu2019assessing}}.


=== Hybrid functionals + U ===
=== Hybrid functionals + U ===
A shortcoming of hybrid functionals is their uniform description of all states, which  
A well-known limitation of hybrid functionals is their uniform treatment of all electronic states, which can result in markedly different levels of accuracy for states with varying degrees of localization. The inclusion of the Hubbard on-site interaction term within the hybrid functional framework ([[:Category:Exchange-correlation functionals#Density functional theory plus U (DFT+U)|hybrid + U]]) has been shown to address inaccuracies arising from the overscreening of localized states {{cite|Ivady2014}}.
can show very different accuracy for states with different degrees of
localization. The introduction of the Hubbard on-site interaction within the
hybrid functional approach was shown to resolve issues caused by
overscreening of localized states {{cite|Ivady2014}}.


=== QPGW ===
=== Quasi-particle GW (QPGW) ===
The [[:Category:GW|GW]] approximation in its simplest form (one-shot approach) is strongly dependent on the
The [[:Category:GW|GW]] approximation in its simplest, non-self-consistent form (i.e., the one-shot approach) exhibits a strong dependence on the choice of starting point, and thus inherits the limitations of the underlying DFT description of localized states. In contrast, self-consistent GW schemes such as QPGW, which are independent of the starting electronic structure, have been shown to provide an accurate description of correlated electrons {{cite|Cunningham2023}}{{Cite|shishkin:prl:2007}}.
starting point and thus suffers from the shortcomings of the DFT for describing
localized states. However, a self-consistent GW approach such as QPGW which does
not depend on the starting electronic structure can yield an accurate
description of the correlated electrons {{cite|Cunningham2023}}.


== Tutorials ==
== Additional resources ==
* Tutorial for [https://www.vasp.at/wiki/NiO_LSDA%2BU NiO LSDA+U calculations]
=== Books ===
* Tutorial for [https://www.vasp.at/tutorials/latest/bulk/part3/#bulk-e09 NiO DFT+U calculations]
* ''Interacting Electrons - Theory and Computational Approaches'' by Richard Martin, Lucia Reining, and David Ceperley - a book about strong correlation {{Cite|martin:book:2016}}.
* Tutorial for [https://vasp.at/wiki/Calculate_U_for_LSDA%2BU NiO Calculate U for LSDA+U calculations]
* ''Dynamical Mean-Field Theory for Strongly Correlated Materials'' by Volodymyr Turkowski - a book about DMFT {{Cite|turkowski:book:2021}}.
* Tutorial for [https://vasp.at/wiki/CRPA_of_SrVO3 CRPA of SrVO3 calculations]
* Tutorial for [https://vasp.at/wiki/Bandstructure_and_CRPA_of_SrVO3 Bandstructure and CRPA of SrVO3 calculations]
* Tutorial for [https://vasp.at/wiki/DFT%2BDMFT_calculations NiO DFT+DMFT calculations]
* Tutorial for [https://www.vasp.at/wiki/NiO_GGA%2BU NiO GGA+U calculations]


== References ==
== References ==


[[Category:Linear response]][[Category:DFT+U]][[Category:VASP]]
[[Category:Linear response]][[Category:DFT+U]][[Category:VASP]]

Latest revision as of 08:30, 20 July 2026

Band structure of a typical strongly correlated system - Ni

Strongly correlated materials are systems in which electron-electron interactions play a dominant role and cannot be adequately described by independent-particle approximations such as standard DFT [1]. These systems typically include elements with partially filled [math]\displaystyle{ d }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ f }[/math] electron orbitals which are localized. Correlation effects lead to phenomena such as metal-insulator transitions, magnetism, and unconventional superconductivity. To model such systems, several extensions of DFT have been developed. Below, you find methods relevant in the context of strongly correlated electrons. Many rely on estimating the on-site Coulomb interaction U.

Estimating the on-site Coulomb interaction U

DFT+U and DFT+DMFT calculations rely on the on-site Coulomb interaction U as an input parameter. There are some strategies to obtain a value for U:

  • Estimate U based on available experimental results. This approach is not fully ab initio, yet it can be the most pragmatic strategy. Here one treats the effective on-site interaction [math]\displaystyle{ U }[/math] as an adjustable parameter, tuning it to reproduce selected experimental observables such as the band gap, magnetic moments, or lattice parameters. For instance, one may perform volume relaxations at different U values to obtain volume as a function of U, $v(U)$. Knowing the experimental value for the volume, a linear fit of $v(U)$ can give an estimate for a suitable U value. This approach relies on the fact that the expansion or localization of the strongly correlated d or f electron orbitals drives the ions to relax at a certain distance. One then use the fixed U value to obtain other quantities like band gap, optical properties. Another approach can be to fit the optical gap to ensure the band-structure properties resemble the experiment, which is crucial for, e.g., binding energies or excited states calculations.
  • Linear-response calculation of [math]\displaystyle{ U }[/math] (LDAUTYPE = 3). Within this approach the effective interaction [math]\displaystyle{ U }[/math] can be determined via the linear response approach [2]
[math]\displaystyle{ U=\chi^{-1}-\chi_0^{-1} \approx\left(\frac{\partial N_I^{\mathrm{SCF}}}{\partial V_I}\right)^{-1}-\left(\frac{\partial N_I^{\mathrm{NSCF}}}{\partial V_I}\right)^{-1}. }[/math]
The shortcoming of this method is that the effective interaction accounts for the response due to all electrons including the target states (localized [math]\displaystyle{ d }[/math] or [math]\displaystyle{ f }[/math] orbitals), thus leading to double counting in the derived effective potential U.
  • Constrained random phase approximation (cRPA) is a first-principles method to estimate U. cRPA allows to separate the screening originating from the target states from the rest of the system and to determine the effective interaction [math]\displaystyle{ U }[/math] that is free of double counting.
The response function without the contribution of the target states or constrained polarizability [math]\displaystyle{ \chi_c }[/math] is calculated by explicitly removing the response in the target space [math]\displaystyle{ \chi_d }[/math] from the total response function:
[math]\displaystyle{ \chi_c(\omega) = \chi(\omega) - \chi_d(\omega) }[/math].
VASP provides several approaches for calculating [math]\displaystyle{ \chi_d }[/math]

DFT+U

DFT+U is the simplest and the most computationally efficient approach to treat strong correlations within electronic structure calculations. Within this approach, standard DFT is augmented with an on-site Hubbard interaction term [math]\displaystyle{ U }[/math] that explicitly penalizes fractional occupation of localized orbitals. The Hubbard interaction is typically applied to [math]\displaystyle{ d }[/math] or [math]\displaystyle{ f }[/math] states.

The total energy within DFT+U can be written as

[math]\displaystyle{ E=E_{DFT}+\sum_I\left[\frac{U^I}{2} \sum_{m, \sigma \neq m^{\prime}, \sigma^{\prime}} n_m^{I \sigma} n_{m^{\prime}}^{I \sigma^{\prime}}-\frac{U^I}{2} n^I\left(n^I-1\right)\right], }[/math]

where the first term is the standard DFT energy, the second term is the Hubbard on-site interaction and the third term accounts for the double counting. The on-site interaction is described by [math]\displaystyle{ U^I }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ n_m^{I\sigma} }[/math] are occupation numbers that are defined as projections of occupied Kohn-Sham orbitals on the states of a localized basis set.

Dynamical mean-field theory (DMFT)

In DFT+DMFT calculations, DMFT[3] augments the DFT calculation with an additional local correlated subproblem — typically a specific [math]\displaystyle{ d }[/math]- or [math]\displaystyle{ f }[/math]-shell. The key idea is to map the full lattice problem onto a quantum impurity model: a single correlated site embedded in a self-consistently determined effective bath representing the rest of the lattice. DMFT can be discussed using the Green's function formalism also used in the context of many-body perturbation theory. The main quantity is the electronic self-energy. Within DMFT it is defined as the sum of all one-particle irreducible diagrams. The central approximation is that the self-energy is frequency-dependent but momentum-independent, i.e., purely local. DFT+DMFT calculations capture many-body effects beyond the reach of DFT+U, such as quasiparticle mass renormalization, Hubbard bands, and the Mott metal–insulator transition. The interaction parameter entering DMFT can be determined as discussed in estimating the on-site Coulomb interaction U.

Other methods

There are other methods that, while not specifically designed for strongly correlated systems, have nonetheless been demonstrated to improve their description and electronic structure.

Hybrid functionals

By incorporating a fraction of exact exchange, hybrid functionals partially mitigate the self-interaction error inherent to standard DFT. This reduction of the self-interaction error has been shown to yield an improved description of strongly correlated systems [4][5].

Hybrid functionals + U

A well-known limitation of hybrid functionals is their uniform treatment of all electronic states, which can result in markedly different levels of accuracy for states with varying degrees of localization. The inclusion of the Hubbard on-site interaction term within the hybrid functional framework (hybrid + U) has been shown to address inaccuracies arising from the overscreening of localized states [6].

Quasi-particle GW (QPGW)

The GW approximation in its simplest, non-self-consistent form (i.e., the one-shot approach) exhibits a strong dependence on the choice of starting point, and thus inherits the limitations of the underlying DFT description of localized states. In contrast, self-consistent GW schemes such as QPGW, which are independent of the starting electronic structure, have been shown to provide an accurate description of correlated electrons [7][8].

Additional resources

Books

  • Interacting Electrons - Theory and Computational Approaches by Richard Martin, Lucia Reining, and David Ceperley - a book about strong correlation [1].
  • Dynamical Mean-Field Theory for Strongly Correlated Materials by Volodymyr Turkowski - a book about DMFT [9].

References

Subcategories

This category has the following 2 subcategories, out of 2 total.