Released-node method

A few alternatives to the FN constraint are available within QMC. The released node method starts from a FN-DMC calculation [56, 57]. When the FN constraint is relaxed (released node QMC) an estimate of the exact ground state energy may be obtained by incorporating a factor of —1 for each walker that crosses the nodal surface ... 

We describe here the simplified version of the released-node method with Green s function sampling. This version allows large step sizes without step size error, eliminates conditional sampling, and eliminates the use of a guide function. Importance sampling is incorporated by use of variable sample weighting. 

Not to leave the reader with the impression that transient estimate and release node calculations are not useful, let us mention briefly some results obtained with these methods. In 1980 a good convergence was obtained on the electron gas with up to 54 electrons [6j. Some of these calculations have recently been redone by Kwon [99] using better wavefunctions and DMC algorithms. Ceperley and Alder [9] also studied some small molecules (LiH, Hj). Recently, Caffarel and Ceperley [67]... 

He ), the node problem can be overcome by exact cancellation methods (described below), and exact solutions can be obtained. For systems of as many as 10 electrons,released-node or transient estimate methods (also described below) can provide excellent approximate solutions. But, in general, the method of choice for systems of more than about 10 electrons is the fixed-node method. Although the fixed-node method is variational and does not yield exact results, it is the only choice available for quantum Monte Carlo calculations on many larger systems. The fixed-node method is remarkably accurate and generally yields energies well below those of the best available analytic variational calculations. 

The method was proposed first by Arnow et al. in 1982 and was developed further with several practical improvements in 1991." We describe the improved method here. In its latest form, it incorporates some of the best features of fixed-node, released-node, and other cancellation methods. It takes full advantage of the symmetric and antisymmetric properties of wavefunc-tions, and it offers pairwise cancellations of walkers as well as self-cancellations and multiple collective cancellations. 

The current situation with the exact Monte Carlo methods, cancellation and released-node, is that, despite early and recent successes, these methods have yet to progress beyond LiH. However, these earlier calculations were performed with simple trial functions, and functions of much higher quality are now available. In addition, recently developed projection methods might extend the applicability of released-node Monte Carlo. 

Figure 4.4 gives an example of an OAET for events that might follow release of gas from a furnace. In this example a gas leak is the initiating event and an explosion is the final hazard. Each task in the sequence is represented by a node in the tree structure. The possible outcomes of the task are depicted as "success" or "failure" paths leading out of the node. This method of task representation does not consider how alternative actions (errors of commission) could give rise to other critical situations. To overcome such problems, separate OAETs must be constructed to model each particular error of commission. 

If you are not so lucky, there are nodes from different nets within the distances (or having exactly the same distances). To solve this, there two different methods can be use. The first is to add extra two-connected nodes between the first set of nodes and then check the distances again. This has the drawback that it is impossible to get a CIO value. The other solution involves changing the original unit cell and thus the distance between the nodes. For unit cells of higher symmetry, it is often necessary to release the restraints on the the cell lengths. 

We have also developed a simplified method [71,72], which is still used in industry to treat practical problems. In this simplified approach, the program directly uses an experimental crystallization curve recorded at an appropriate cooling rate. The gradual release of the latent heat between the onset (Tonset) and the end (T nd) of crystallization gives rise to an exothermal peak (see Fig. 15.4), which can be approximated by an isosceles triangle with an area equal to the enthalpy of crystallization per unit mass AH. The temperature profile at step i-1 (along x) and the heat Ahj already released by the crystallization of a mass element located at node (i-lj) are supposed to be known. The temperature profile T(/,... 

---