Matrix equation, representation

A formulation of electronic rearrangement in quantum molecular dynamics has been based on the Liouville-von Neumann equation for the density matrix. Introducing an eikonal representation, it naturally leads to a general treatment where Hamiltonian equations for nuclear motions are coupled to the electronic density matrix equations, in a formally exact theory. Expectation values of molecular operators can be obtained from integrations over initial conditions. 

Figure 4-12. Schematic representation of the matrix equation yi=aiFi.

Figure 4-13. Schematic representation of the matrix equations involving multiplication of y by the left pseudo-inverse F+=(FtF) 1Ft.

Physicist P. A. M. Dirac suggested an inspired notation for the Hilbert space of quantum mechanics [essentially, the Euclidean space of (9.20a, b) for / — oo, which introduces some subtleties not required for the finite-dimensional thermodynamic geometry]. Dirac s notation applies equally well to matrix equations [such as (9.7)-(9.19)] and to differential equations [such as Schrodinger s equation] that relate operators (mathematical objects that change functions or vectors of the space) and wavefunctions in quantum theory. Dirac s notation shows explicitly that the disparate-looking matrix mechanical vs. wave mechanical representations of quantum theory are actually equivalent, by exhibiting them in unified symbols that are free of the extraneous details of a particular mathematical representation. Dirac s notation can also help us to recognize such commonality in alternative mathematical representations of equilibrium thermodynamics. 

Let us emphasize that we have made no approximations yet. Equation (3.13) is a set of simultaneous differential equations for the coefficients cm that determine the state function (3.13) is fully equivalent to the time-dependent Schrodinger equation. [The column vector c(/) whose elements are the coefficients ck in (3.8) is the state vector in the representation that uses the tyj s as basis functions. Thus (3.13) is a matrix formulation of the time-dependent Schrodinger equation and can be written as the matrix equation ihdc/dt = Gc, where dc/dt has elements dcmf dt and G is the square matrix with elements exp(.iu>mkt)H mk. ... 

Hence we have the matrix equation RS = W, so that the matrices (9.44) multiply the same way the symmetry operations do and form a representation of the point group. The functions Fl,F2,...,Fn are said to form a basis for the representation (9.44), which consists of the matrices that describe how these functions transform upon application of the symmetry operators. Any member of the set Fv...,Fn is said to belong to the representation (9.44). We denote the representation (9.44) by TF it may be reducible or irreducible. 

The -matrices of Figs. 2 and 3 are representations for the molecules of the starting and end points of a chemical reaction, the formation of the cyanohydrin 1 of formaldehyde from its components 2 and 3. Taking the difference between these two matrices — from each element of the first matrix the corresponding element of the second matrix has to be subtracted — one obtains another matrix (see Fig. 5). This matrix is a representation of the reaction itself, and is therefore called a reaction matrix or / -matrix. Rearranging the matrix equation of Fig. 5 gives Fig. 6. 

In the implementation of the method one may thus either assemble information obtained on an element by element basis into a global representation of the problem or assemble the information from the complete system form instead. Some assembling techniques are outlined by Jiang [84], chap 15. Finally, standard numerical techniques may be used to solve the global system matrix equation for the unknown field variables. 

Solution of the matrix equations associated with an independent particle model gives rise to a representation of the spectrum which is an essential ingredient of any correlation treatment. Finite order many-order perturbation theory(82) forms the basis of a method for treating correlation effects which remains tractable even when the large basis sets required to achieve high accuracy are employed. Second-order many-body perturbation theory is a particularly simple and effective approach especially when a direct implementation is employed. The total correlation energy is written... 

In the case of finite-basis sets, which are used for the representation of the one-electron spinors, the basis sets for the small component must be restricted such as to maintain kinetic balance (Stanton and Havriliak 1984), which means in terms of the rearranged second equation in the matrix equations (2.4) that... 

Independently of the approximations used for the representation of the spinors (numerical or basis expansion), matrix equations are obtained for Equations (2.4) that must be solved iteratively, as the potential v(r) depends on the solution spinors. The quality of the resulting solutions can be assessed as in the nonrelativistic case by the use of the relativistic virial theorem (Kim 1967 Rutkowski et al. 1993), which has been generalized to allow for finite nuclear models (Matsuoka and Koga 2001). The extensive contributions by I. P. Grant to the development of the relativistic theory of many-electron systems has been paid tribute to recently (Karwowski 2001). The higher-order QED corrections, which need to be considered for heavy atoms in addition to the four-component Dirac description, have been reviewed in great detail (Mohr et al. 1998) and in Chapter 1 of this book. 

Undoubtedly, the Hohenberg-Kohn theorem has spurred much activity in density functional theory. In fact, most of the developments in this field are based on its tenets. Nevertheless, the approximate nature of all such developments, renders them functionally" non-jV-representable. This simple means that all approximate methods based on the Hohenberg-Kohn theorem are not in a one to one correspondence with either the Schrodinger equation or with the variational principle from which this equation ensues [21, 22], Thus, the specter of the 2-matrix N-representability problem creeps back in density functional theory. Unfortunately, the immanence of such a problem has not been adequately appreciated. It has been mistakenly assumed that this 2-matrix /V-representability condition in density matrix theory may be translocated into /V-representability conditions on the one-particle density [22], As the latter problem is trivially solved [23, 24], it has been concluded that /V-representability is of no account in the Hohenberg-Kohn-based versions of density functional theory. As discused in detail elsewhere [22], this is far from being the case. Hence, the lack of functional. /V-representability occurring in all these approximate versions, introduces a very serious defect and leads to erroneous results. 

If a discrete representation is adopted, by expressing all functions jc in terms of a complete set k- and collecting any set of expainsion coefficients as a column vector c/f, all equations turn into matrix equations, in the usual way for ex2unple, when C = AB there is a corresponding matrix equation C = AB, where the elements of the (infinite) matrices are defined as above. 

The symmetry operations of rotation, reflection, inversion and glide reflection obey all the tenets of group theory [3,5]. Matrix equations can express the results of these operations. The trace or spur of diagonal matrices (Appendix 3D) is particularly valuable in condensing the information contained in symmetry operations on polymer chain subunits. The terms irreducible representation, symmetry type, and species are also used in denoting the trace [12]. 

Disregarding the replication of the genomic DNA (step a) and the changes in the metabolome M for now (i.e., assume G and M to be constant), a mathematical representation of the dynamics of the GRN in Figure 1 would be the following set of vector-matrix equations ... 

In recent years, the first order finite difference methods have been superseded by nodal methods. In these the flux in each mesh element, or node, is represented by a set of orthogonal functions, such as Legendre polynomials for each direction, or other types of expansion. Using such flux representations, a more accurate solution can be obtained using a coarser mesh. The matrix equations relating the various components of the flux become more complicated, involving a relationship between components of the flux inside the node and on the surfaces. 

This form of the matrix equation displays the structure of the matrix representation of an operator that is symmetric under time reversal, given in (10.30)... 

The spectral representations above are not computationally efficient, as they would require knowledge of all intermediate excited states. Computationally tractable formulas for the response functions within the various approximate methods are obtained instead through the following steps (1) choose a time-independent reference wavefunction (2) choose a parametrization of its time-development, for instance an exponential parametrization (3) set up the appropriate equations for the time development of the chosen wavefunction parameters (4) solve these equations in orders of the perturbation to obtain the wavefunction (parameters) (5) insert the solutions of these equations into the expectation value expression and obtain the RTFs and (6) identify the excited-state properties from the poles and residues. The computationally tractable formulas for the response functions therefore differ depending on the electronic structure method at hand, and the true spectral representations given above are only valid in the limit of a frill-configuration interaction (FCI) wavefunction. For approximate methods (i.e., where electron correlation is only partially included), matrix equations appear instead of the SOS expressions, for example. 

Now if one writes a matrix equation for each column in Table IX, one now obtains a set of 6 X 6 matrices that is a group and it is a six-dimensional representation. Thus the correspondence is given below along with the trace for each matrix ... 

For a transition state, in terms of a diagonal Hessian representation, this gives rise to the two matrix equations ... 

The second method is based on a representation of the 4 x 4 Hamiltonian operator matrix, equation (11), which accomplishes by means of a unitary transformation (which, as it turns out, must itself depend necessarily on the dynamic degrees of freedom, i.e energy and momentum of the particles) to remove terms which couple upper and lower components. If this transformation is parametrized in the form... 

---