Response function matrix representation

This tutorial looks at how MATLAB commands are used to convert transfer functions into state-space vector matrix representation, and back again. The discrete-time response of a multivariable system is undertaken. Also the controllability and observability of multivariable systems is considered, together with pole placement design techniques for both controllers and observers. The problems in Chapter 8 are used as design examples. 

Polarization propagators or linear response functions are normally not calculated from their spectral representation but from an alternative matrix representation [25,46-48] which avoids the explicit calculation of the excited states. 

In this section we are going to develop a different approach to the calculation of excitation energies which is based on TDDFT [69, 84, 152]. Similar ideas were recently proposed by Casida [223] on the basis of the one-particle density matrix. To extract excitation energies from TDDFT we exploit the fact that the frequency-dependent linear density response of a finite system has discrete poles at the excitation energies of the unperturbed system. The idea is to use the formally exact representation (156) of the linear density response n j (r, cu), to calculate the shift of the Kohn-Sham orbital energy differences coj (which are the poles of the Kohn-Sham response function) towards the true excitation energies Sl in a systematic fashion. 

The simplest approximation in the BSE-GW method is to start from the noninteracting HE Green s function Gq, leading to the noninteracting HE linear response function Xip = -iGoGo = Xo whose matrix representation reads... 

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. 

In Section 10.1 we will illustrate this for ground-state expectation values such as Eq. (4.25) and many others and in Section 10.2 for sum-over-states expressions such as Eq. (4.74) and many others. In the rest of the chapter we will discuss methods in which approximations are made to the exact matrix representation of the linear response function or polarization propagator given in Eq. (3.159). This equation is exact as long as a complete set of excitation and de-excitation operators hn is used and the reference state is an eigenfunction of the imperturbed Hamiltonian. 

Second, progress has been made in the theoretical approach to the analysis of DCEMS measurements. The underlying theory of resonance excitation (-> excitation matrix) in the sample by y-quanta including secondary absorption and emission processes, electron transport (- transport tensor), and detection response (—> response function) have been included in a least-squares fit routine [ 103. 105). Adjustable parameters in this fitting are. on the one hand, the hyperfine interaction and line shape variables, and, on the other hand, the variables that give a parametric representation of the depth profiles. The response parameters are also included to allow energy calibration of the experimental apparatus. 

The human resourcing of the project defines WHO is actually going to carry out the WHAT of the project. The responsibilities for each aspect of the project are assigned to individual members of the team. This also allows any other responsibilities, which are outside their direct control, to be identified. On this basis the specific requirements of staff from each department or work group required for the programme to be a success will become clear. This definition and allocation of responsibilities can be illustrated in many ways. One of the simplest representations is a matrix, based on the activities identified in the work breakdown analysis and the functional responsibility within that activity (Table D2). 

---