Spin-orbital form

VVc can now see why the normalisation factor of the Slater determinantal wavefunction is I v/N . If each determinant contains N terms then the product of two Slater determinants, ldeU rminant][determinant], contains (N ) terms. However, if the spin orbitals form an oi lhonormal set then oidy products of identical terms from the determinant will be nonzero when integrated over all space. We Ccm illustrate this with the three-electron example, k ljiiiidering just the first two terms in the expansion we obtain the following ... 

At the same time, Meissner, Kucharski and others [56,57] developed the quadratic MR CCSD method in a spin-orbital form which does not exploit the BCH formula. The unknown cluster amplitudes are calculated from the so-called generalized Bloch equation [45-47,49,64,65] (or in our language the Bloch equation in the Rayleigh-Schrodinger form)... 

Turning now back to the single-root MR BWCC approach, we derive the basic equations for the effective Hamiltonian and cluster amplitudes in the spin-orbital form without the use of the BCH formula. We limit ourselves to a complete model space which implies that amplitudes corresponding to internal excitations (i.e. excitations within the model space) are equal to zero. In our derivation we shall work with the Hamiltonian in the normal-ordered-product form, i.e. 

Equations for the Fock space coupled cluster method, including all single, double, and triple excitations (FSCCSDT) for ionization potentials [(0,1) sector], are presented in both operator and spin orbital form. Two approximations to the full FSCCSDT equations are described, one being the simplest perturbative inclusion of triple excitation effects, FSCCSD+T(3), and a second that indirectly incorporates certain higher-order effects, FSCCSD+T (3). 

These operator equations can be transformed into spin-orbital form, essentially that necessary for a computer implementation, after spin integrations, via the usual CC methods. The resulting equations for the FSCCSDT method for ionization potentials are given in Eq. 18-21, below. 

Using the spinor form (2.2) we can go from the spin orbital form (2.5) of the Fock-Dirac matrix to the orbital form ... 

Similarly we have the spin orbital form of the total GHF energy... 

As shown in Exercise 2.1, the 2K unrestricted spin orbitals form an orthonormal set, in spite of the fact that the a and fi spatial orbitals are not orthogonal. 

The nuclear radii are Rj - and the parameters encode the diffuseness of the nuclear surface. The subscript (i) allows these constants to be different for the different terms in the potential. The spin-orbit form is analogous to the Thomas form for atoms. Relativistic treatments generate such a term, but do not provide insight into the strength or even its sign. The Coulomb potential can be taken to be that for uniformly charged spheres or calculated numerically assuming form factors for the density similar to that for the potential. 

The second issue is that, in a scalar basis, the set of spin-orbitals formed by taking the direct product of the scalar basis and the spin functions spans both j values for a given angular momentum. This is not a particular problem for the large component—-in fact in an uncontracted basis set it is an advantage—but it does present some problems in the small-component basis. For a large-component s set, the small-component p set generated by kinetic balance forms spin-orbitals that span both the P /2 and the p3/2 space. Only the p /2 spinors are needed for the small component... 

Look at Section 14.2, going only as far as (14.2.8), and use this result to justify the representation of a closed-shell core (p. 224) by means of an effective Hamiltonian. Obtain an explicit expression for when Ae core orbitals are of LCAO form. Obtain matrix elements of the 1-electron operator h ff relative to an AO basis for the electrons outside the core, in terms of the core density matrix Pc. [Hint do the spin integrations to pass from spin-orbital forms to orbital forms, and introduce finite-basis approximations in the usual way.]... 

This progress is encouraging, but some issues still need to be resolved. For materials with periodic boundary conditions or non-collinear magnetism, EBOs will probably be easiest to compute using a modified form of the projector in eqn (5.43) that explicitly accounts for spin degrees of freedom. This will require only the electron and spin density distributions as inputs. Tests also need to be performed to see whether explicit averaging over the hole, as shown in eqn (5.43), increases the EBO accuracy compared with the simplified correlation shown in eqn (5.40). Since eqn (5.40) was only tested for spin unpolarized systems, additional tests need to be performed for spin polarized systems. For non-periodie systems, EBOs computed with proposed projectors should be carefully compared to NAOP bond orders. Because the Kohn-Sham DFT spin-orbitals form a single Slater determinant, the basin EBO has the form... 

---