the electron self-energy in the green’s-function approach
TRANSCRIPT
The Electron Self-Energy in the Green’s-Function Approach: Beyond the GW Approximation
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 1
Yasutami Takada Institute for Solid State Physics, University of Tokyo
5-1-5 Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Chiba 277-8581, Japan Benascue Center for Science, Spain
09:50-10:40, 12 September 2008 Kashiwa Campus, Univ. of Tokyo
ISSP
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 2
1. Introduction ○ Hedin’s theory: Self-consistent set of equations for G, Σ, W, Π, and Γ ○ GW scheme for Σ
2. Vertex Function ○ Introducing “the ratio function” ○ Averaging the irreducible electron-hole effective interaction ○ Exact functional form for Γ and an approximation scheme for Γ
3. Beyond GW Scheme ○ GWΓ scheme for Σ
4. Illustration in the Low-Density Electron Liquid ○ Comparison with experiment: ARPES and the problem of occupied
bandwidth of the Na 3s band
5. Summary and Outlook for Future cf. YT, PRL87, 226402 (2001); YT & H. Yasuhara, PRL89, 216402 (2002).
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 3
L. Hedin: Phys. Rev. 139, A796 (1965)
Φ[G]: Luttinger-Ward energy functional, defined in terms of V
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 4
In actual calculations, it is very often the case that Γ is taken as unity, neglecting the vertex correction altogether (do not solve the BS equation). GW approximation ( Kerstin Hummer’s talk)
Even the self-consistent iterative procedure is abandoned.
G0W0 (one-shot GW) calculation
V(q)=4πe2/q2
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 5
Scalar and vector vertex functions: Γ and Γ
γ : bare vector (or velocity) vertex : combined notation
This determines not only the scalar part Γ but also the vector part Γ, by just changing the bare vertices.
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 6
Those vertex functions satisfy the Ward identity, representing the conservation of local electron number (or the gauge invariance):
In the GW approximation, this basic law is not respected, simply because only the corrections in Σ are included.
This relation is important, because the irreducible EH effective interaction is not included explicitly.
1. Introducing “the ratio function”:
2. Introducing “the average of the irreducible electron-hole effective interaction”:
3. Exact relation between and
4. Exact functional form for in terms
of
5. Approximation to this functional form Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 7
Steps to derive a useful functional form for Γ
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 8
10 Definition: Ratio between the scalar vertex and the longitudinal part of the vector vertex
20 Represent the vertex functions in terms of R(p+q,p):
30 Basic strategy: Make an approximation for both Γ and Γ through R(p+q,p), which automatically guarantees the Ward identity.
combination with the Ward identity
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 9
10 Definition:
20 Rewrite the Bethe-Salpeter equation using as
30 Accurate functional form for Γ(p+q,p):
-Π(q)
give R(p+q,p) and then calculate Γ through the previous equation for Γ:
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 10
10 Assume
20 Dielectric Function
: RPA
: Local Field Correction
: GWΓ
V(q)=4πe2/q2
put this form into the definition of Π(q), leading to
This function has been intuitively introduced and discussed by: G. Niklasson, PRB10, 3052 (1974); G. Vignale, PRB38, 6445 (1988); C. F. Richardson and N. W. Ashcroft, PRB50, 8170
(1994). Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 11
Rewrite ΠWI(q):
ΠWI(q) is reduced to “the modified Lindhard function”:
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 12
Choose with using the modified local field correction G+(q,iωq) in the Richardson-Ashcroft form [PRB50, 8170 (1994)].
This G+(q,iωq) is not the usual one, but is defined for the true particle or in terms of ΠWI(q). Accuracy in using this G+(q,iωq) was well assessed by M. Lein, E. K. U. Gross, and J. P. Perdew, PRB61, 13431 (2000).
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 13
◎ Original GWΓ scheme [YT, PRL87, 226402 (2001)]: (1) Time consuming in calculating Π (2) Difficulty associated with the divergence of Π at rs=5.25 where κ diverges in the electron gas.
・ Density Response Function Qc(q,ω)
・ Monte Carlo data at ω=0: S. Moroni, D. M.
Ceperley, and G. Senatore, PRL75, 689 (1995).
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 14
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 15
YT, PRL89, 226402 (2001); Int. J. Mod. Phys. B15, 2595
(2001).
Note: This Σ(p,ω) is shifted by µxc. ・Nonmonotonic behavior of the life time of the quasiparticle
(related to the onset of the Landau damping of plasmons) ・Plasmon satellites (Plasmaron)
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 16
Exact results at half filling
Effect of broadening: ω ω+iγ
Basically the same shape.
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 17
Inelastic electron mean free path: l Important in all kinds of surface electron spectroscopy
lp-1 = -2ImΣ(p,Ep)/vp; E=Ep
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 18
cf. EPX (Effective-Potential Expansion)
data: YT & H. Yasuhara, PRB44, 7879 (1991); P. Gori-Giorgi & P. Ziesche, PRB66,
235116 (2002)
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 19
Effective mass m* of the quasiparticle is about the same as that of a free electron m, but a little smaller than
m (m*/m < 1)
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 20
The shape of Σ is similar, But its magnitude is much enhanced
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 21
m*/m > 1 for p<pF correlation effect dominates; m*/m < 1 for p>pF exchange effect dominates.
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 22
ReΣ(p,Ep) and ImΣ(p,Ep) • ReΣ increases monotonically. very slight widening of the bandwidth • ReΣ is fairly flat for p<1.5pF reason for success of LDA • ReΣ is in proportion to 1/p for p>2pF and it can never be neglected at p=4.5pF where Ep=66eV. (interacting electron-gas model)
No abrupt changes in Σ(p,ω).
Although it cannot be seen In the RPA, the structure a can be clearly seen, which represents the electron-hole multiple scattering (or excitonic) effect.
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 23
YT and H. Yasuhara,PRL89, 216402 (2002).
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 24
YT, J. Superconductivity 18, 785 (2005).
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 25
Consequence: Nanoscale density fluctuations & MIT in the fluid alkali metals near the liquid-gas critical point cf. K. Matsuda et al., PRL 98, 096401 (2007); H. Maebashi & YT, cond-mat/0807.1454
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 26
Angle-Resolved Photoemission Spectroscopy
Observation of photo electron ejected by soft x-ray(20-40eV) Direct observation of quasiparticle
Conventional assumption: The final state is well described by “the free-electron model”
In-Whan Lyo & E. W. Plummer, PRL60, 1558 (1988)
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 27
Na (110) with photon energy ω = 16-66 eV
Bandwidth narrowing by 18%
rs = 4 EF = 3.13eV
This is quantitatively reproduced by the GW approximation: regarded as Hallmark of GW
H. Yasuhara, S. Yoshinaga, & M. Higuchi, PRL83, 3250 (1999)
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 28
Based on this model, the bandwidth is not narrowed.
Compared my fully self-consistent result of Σ(p,ω) with properly including the vertex corrections
Yasuhara’s calculation of the self-energy is not a self-consistent one, violating some sum-rules; an important question raised by Ku, Eguiluz, & Plummer, PRL85, 2410 (2000).
Yasuhara claims that the final states of energies less than about 100 eV should be considered as “an interacting electron-gas model”.
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 29
Analysis of ARPES in terms of the interacting electron-gas model for the final state The experimental data analyzed on the free-electron model should be compared with Ep
vir, defined by
• Final state should be analyzed with using the interacting electron-gas model. • Actual bandwidth of Na is not narrowed but slightly widened. clear indication of the flaw of GW.
◎ Need to calculate: (1) ΠWI(q) Π0(q) in GW cf. F. Aryasetiawan and O. Gunnarsson, Rep. Prog. Phys. 61, 237 (1998). (2) I(q) fxc(q,ω) in TDDFT cf. L. Reining et al. PRL94, 186402(2005) ; PRB72, 125203 (2005).
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 30
◎ In insulators:
cf. YT, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 54, 1779 (1993) ; PRB52, 12708, 12720 (1995).
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 31
Inclusion of ΓWI will give correct excitation energies, while GW does not. (Note that spectrum strengths are not always correct in this GISC approximation.)
Self-Energy beyond the GW Approximation (Takada) 32
10 Suggested a useful functional form for the vertex function Γ. 20 Given an important message that ARPES should be not analyzed in terms of a free-electron model but an interacting electron-gas model. 30 Shown that the occupied bandwidth of sodium is not narrowed but slightly widened, which cannot be reproduced in the GW approximation. 40 Some new physics is discussed in the low-density electron liquid, including the anomalous dielectric response and the metal-insulator transition.