\section{Denstiy functional theory}
\label{section:dft}
-In quantum-mechanical modeling the problem of describing the many-body problem, i.e. a system of a large amount of interacting particles, is manifested in the high-dimensional Schr\"odinger equation for the wave function $\Psi({\vec{R}},{\vec{r}})$ that depends on the coordinates of all nuclei and electrons.
+Dirac declared that chemistry has come to an end, its content being entirely contained in the powerul equation published by Schr\"odinger in 1926 \cite{schroedinger26} marking the beginning of wave mechanics.
+Following the path of Schr\"odinger the problem in quantum-mechanical modeling of describing the many-body problem, i.e. a system of a large amount of interacting particles, is manifested in the high-dimensional Schr\"odinger equation for the wave function $\Psi({\vec{R}},{\vec{r}})$ that depends on the coordinates of all nuclei and electrons.
The Schr\"odinger equation contains the kinetic energy of the ions and electrons as well as the electron-ion, ion-ion and electron-electron interaction.
-This cannot be solved exactly and there are several layers of approximations to reduce the number of parameters.
-The key point in density functional theory (DFT) is to recast the problem to a description using the charge density $n(\vec{r})$ that depends on only three spatial coordinates instead of the many-body wave function.
-Formally DFT can be regarded as an exactification of both, the Thomas Fermi and Hartree theory.
+This cannot be solved exactly and finding approximate solutions requires several layers of simplification in order to reduce the number of free parameters.
+Approximations that consider a truncated Hilbert space of single-particle orbitals yield promising results, however, with increasing complexity and demand for high accuracy the amount of Slater determinats to be evaluated massively increases.
+
+In contrast, instead of using the description by the many-body wave function, the key point in density functional theory (DFT) is to recast the problem to a description utilizing the charge density $n(\vec{r})$, which constitutes a quantity in real space depending only on the three spatial coordinates.
In the following sections the basic idea of DFT will be outlined.
+As will be shown, DFT can formally be regarded as an exactification of the Thomas Fermi theory \cite{thomas27,fermi27} and the self-consistent Hartree equations \cite{hartree28}.
+A nice review is given in the Nobel lecture of Kohn \cite{kohn99}, one of the inventors of DFT.
\subsection{Born-Oppenheimer approximation}
-The first approximation employed
+Born and Oppenheimer proposed a simplification enabling the effective decoupling of the electronic and ionic degrees of freedom \cite{born27}.
+Within the Born-Oppenheimer (BO) approximation the light electrons are assumed to move much faster and, thus, follow adiabatically to the motion of the heavy nuclei, if the latter are only slightly deflected from their equilibrium positions.
+Thus, on the timescale of electronic motion the ions appear at fixed positions.
+On the other way round, on the timescale of nuclear motion the electrons appear blurred in space adding an extra term to the ion-ion potential.
+The simplified Schr\"odinger equation no longer contains the kinetic energy of the ions.
+The momentary positions of the ions enter as fixed parameters and, therefore, the ion-ion interaction may be regarded as a constant added to the electronic energies.
+The Schr\"odinger equation describing the remaining electronic problem reads
+\begin{equation}
+\left[-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\sum_j\nabla^2_j-
+\sum_{j,l} \frac{Z_le^2}{|\vec{r}_j-\vec{R}_l|}+
+\frac{1}{2}\sum_{j\neq j'}\frac{e^2}{|\vec{r}_j-\vec{r}_{j'}|}
+\right] \Psi = E \Psi
+\text{ ,}
+\end{equation}
+where $Z_l$ are the atomic numbers of the nuclei and $\Psi$ is the many-electron wave function, which depends on the positions and spins of the electrons.
+Accordingly, there is only a parametrical dependence on the ionic coordinates $\vec{R}_l$.
+However, the remaining number of free parameters is still too high and need to be further decreased.
+
+\subsection{Hohenberg-Kohn theorem and variational principle}
-\subsection{Hohenberg-Kohn theorem}
+Investigating the energetics of Cu$_x$Zn$_{1-x}$ alloys, which for different compositions exhibit different transfers of charge between the Cu and Zn unit cells due to their chemical difference and, thus, varying electrostatic interactions contributing to the total energy, the work of Hohenberg and Kohn had a natural focus on the distribution of charge.
+Although it was clear that the Thomas Fermi (TF) theory only provides a rough approximation to the exact solution of the many-electron Schr\"odinger equation the theory was of high interest since it provides an implicit relation of the potential and the electron density distribution.
+This raised the question how to establish a connection between TF expressed in terms of $n(\vec{r})$ and the exact Schr\"odinger equation expressed in terms of the many-electron wave function $\Psi({\vec{r}})$ and whether a complete description in terms of the charge density is possible in principle.
+The answer to this question, whether the charge density completely characterizes a system, became the starting point of modern DFT.
-\subsection{Effective potential}
+Considering a system with a nondegenerate ground state there is obviously only one ground-state charge density $n_0(\vec{r})$ that correpsonds to a given potential $V(\vec{r})$.
+In 1964 Hohenberg and Kohn showed the opposite and far less obvious result \cite{hohenberg64}.
+Employing no more than the Rayleigh-Ritz minimal principle it is concluded by {\em reductio ad absurdum} that for a nondegenerate ground state the same charge density cannot be generated by different potentials.
+Thus, the charge density of the ground state $n_0(\vec{r})$ uniquely determines the potential $V(\vec{r})$ and, consequently, the full Hamiltonian and ground-state energy $E_0$.
+In mathematical terms the full many-electron ground state is a unique functional of the charge density.
+Im particular, $E$ is a functional $E[n(\vec{r})]$ of $n(\vec{r})$.
+
+The ground-state charge density $n_0(\vec{r})$ minimizes the energy functional $E[n(\vec{r})]$, its value corresponding to the ground-state energy $E_0$, which enables the formulation of a minimal principle in terms of the charge density \cite{hohenberg64,levy82}
+\begin{equation}
+E_0=\min_{n(\vec{r})}
+ \left\{
+ F[n(\vec{r})] + \int n(\vec{r}) V(\vec{r}) d\vec{r}
+ \right\}
+ \text{ ,}
+\label{eq:basics:hkm}
+\end{equation}
+where $F[n(\vec{r})]$ is a universal functional of the charge density $n(\vec{r})$, which is composed of the kinetic energy functional $T[n(\vec{r})]$ and the interaction energy functional $U[n(\vec{r})]$.
+The challenging problem of determining the exact ground-state is now formally reduced to the determination of the $3$-dimensional function $n(\vec{r})$, which minimizes the energy functional.
+However, the complexity associated with the many-electron problem is now relocated in the task of finding the well-defined but, in contrast to the potential energy, not explicitly known functional $F[n(\vec{r})]$.
+
+It is worth to note, that this minimal principle may be regarded as exactification of the TF theory, which is rederived by the approximations
+\begin{equation}
+T=\int n(\vec{r})\frac{3}{10}k_{\text{F}}^2(n(\vec{r}))d\vec{r}
+\text{ ,}
+\end{equation}
+\begin{equation}
+U=\frac{1}{2}\int\frac{n(\vec{r})n(\vec{r}')}{|\vec{r}-\vec{r}'|}d\vec{r}d\vec{r}'
+\text{ .}
+\end{equation}
\subsection{Kohn-Sham system}
+Inspired by the Hartree equations, i.e. a set of self-consistent single-particle equations for the approximate solution of the many-electron problem \cite{hartree28}, which describe atomic ground states much better than the TF theory, Kohn and Sham presented a Hartree-like formulation of the Hohenberg and Kohn minimal principle \eqref{eq:basics:hkm} \cite{kohn65}.
+However, due to a more general approach, the new formulation is formally exact by introducing the energy functional $E_{\text{xc}}[n(vec{r})]$, which accounts for the exchange and correlation energy of the electron interaction $U$ and possible corrections due to electron interaction to the kinetic energy $T$.
+The respective Kohn-Sham equations for the effective single-particle wave functions $\Phi_i(\vec{r})$ take the form
+\begin{equation}
+\left[
+ -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\nabla^2 + V_{\text{eff}}(\vec{r})
+\right] \Phi_i(\vec{r})=\epsilon_i\Phi_i(\vec{r})
+\label{eq:basics:kse1}
+\text{ ,}
+\end{equation}
+\begin{equation}
+V_{\text{eff}}=V(\vec{r})+\int\frac{e^2n(\vec{r}')}{|\vec{r}-\vec{r}'|}d\vec{r}'
+ + V_{\text{xc}(\vec{r})}
+\text{ ,}
+\label{eq:basics:kse2}
+\end{equation}
+\begin{equation}
+n(\vec{r})=\sum_{i=1}^N |\Phi_i(\vec{r})|^2
+\text{ ,}
+\label{eq:basics:kse3}
+\end{equation}
+where the local exchange-correlation potential $V_{\text{xc}}(\vec{r})$ is the partial derivative of the exchange-correlation functional $E_{\text{xc}}[n(\vec{r})]$ with respect to the charge density $n(\vec{r})$ for the ground-state $n_0(\vec{r})$.
+The first term in equation \eqref{eq:basics:kse1} corresponds to the kinetic energy of non-interacting electrons and the second term of equation \eqref{eq:basics:kse2} is just the Hartree contribution to the interaction energy.
+%\begin{equation}
+%V_{\text{xc}}(\vec{r})=\frac{\partial}{\partial n(\vec{r})}
+% E_{\text{xc}}[n(\vec{r})] |_{n(\vec{r})=n_0(\vec{r})}
+%\end{equation}
+
+The system of interacting electrons is mapped to an auxiliary system, the Kohn-Sham (KS) system, of non-interacting electrons in an effective potential.
+The exact effective potential $V_{\text{eff}}(\vec{r})$ may be regarded as a fictious external potential yielding a gound-state density for non-interacting electrons, which is equal to that for interacting electrons in the external potential $V(\vec{r})$.
+The one-electron KS orbitals $\Phi_i(\vec{r})$ as well as the respective KS energies $\epsilon_i$ are not directly attached to any physical observable except for the ground-state density, which is determined by equation \eqref{eq:basics:kse3} and the ionization energy, which is equal to the highest occupied relative to the vacuum level.
+The KS equations may be considered the formal exactification of the Hartree theory, which it is reduced to if the exchange-correlation potential and functional are neglected.
+In addition to the Hartree-Fock (HF) method, KS theory includes the difference of the kinetic energy of interacting and non-interacting electrons as well as the remaining contributions to the correlation energy that are not part of the HF correlation.
+
+The self-consistent KS equations \eqref{eq:basics:kse1}, \eqref{eq:basics:kse2} and \eqref{eq:basics:kse3} are non-linear partial differential equations, which may be solved numerically by an iterative process.
+Starting from a first approximation for $n(\vec{r})$ the effective potential $V_{\text{eff}}(\vec{r})$ can be constructed followed by determining the one-electron orbitals $\Phi_i(\vec{r})$, which solve the single-particle Schr\"odinger equation for the respective potential.
+The $\Phi_i(\vec{r})$ are used to obtain a new expression for $n(\vec{r})$.
+These steps are repeated until the initial and new density are equal or reasonably converged.
+
+Again, it is worth to note that the KS equations are formally exact.
+Assuming exact functionals $E_{\text{xc}}[n(\vec{r})]$ and potentials $V_{\text{xc}}(\vec{r})$ all many-body effects are included.
+Clearly, this directs attention to the functional, which now contains the costs involved with the many-electron problem.
+
\subsection{Approximations for exchange and correlation}
+\label{subsection:ldagga}
+
+As discussed above, the HK and KS formulations are exact and so far no approximations except the adiabatic approximation entered the theory.
+However, to make concrete use of the theory, effective approximations for the exchange and correlation energy functional $E_{\text{xc}}[n(\vec{r})]$ are required.
+
+Most simple and at the same time remarkably useful is the approximation of $E_{\text{xc}}[n(\vec{r})]$ by a function of the local density \cite{kohn65}
+\begin{equation}
+E^{\text{LDA}}_{\text{xc}}[n(\vec{r})]=\int\epsilon_{\text{xc}}(n(\vec{r}))n(\vec{r}) d\vec{r}
+\text{ ,}
+\label{eq:basics:xca}
+\end{equation}
+which is, thus, called local density approximation (LDA).
+Here, the exchange-correlation energy per particle of the uniform electron gas of constant density $n$ is used for $\epsilon_{\text{xc}}(n(\vec{r}))$.
+Although, even in such a simple case, no exact form of the correlation part of $\epsilon_{\text{xc}}(n)$ is known, highly accurate numerical estimates using Monte Carlo methods \cite{ceperley80} and corresponding paramterizations exist \cite{perdew81}.
+Obviously exact for the homogeneous electron gas, the LDA was {\em a priori} expected to be useful only for densities varying slowly on scales of the local Fermi or TF wavelength.
+Nevertheless, LDA turned out to be extremely successful in describing some properties of highly inhomogeneous systems accurately within a few percent.
+Although LDA is known to overestimate the cohesive energy in solids by \unit[10-20]{\%}, the lattice parameters are typically determined with an astonishing accuracy of about \unit[1]{\%}.
+
+More accurate approximations of the exchange-correlation functional are realized by the introduction of gradient corrections with respect to the density \cite{kohn65}.
+Respective considerations are based on the concept of an exchange-correlation hole density describing the depletion of the electron density in the vicinity of an electron.
+The averaged hole density can be used to give a formally exact expression for $E_{\text{xc}}[n(\vec{r})]$ and an equivalent expression \cite{kohn96,kohn98}, which makes use of the electron density distribution $n(\tilde{\vec{r}})$ at positions $\tilde{\vec{r}}$ near $\vec{r}$, yielding the form
+\begin{equation}
+E_{\text{xc}}[n(\vec{r})]=\int\epsilon_{\text{xc}}(\vec{r};[n(\tilde{\vec{r}})])n(\vec{r}) d\vec{r}
+\end{equation}
+for the exchange-correlation energy, where $\epsilon_{\text{xc}}(\vec{r};[n(\tilde{\vec{r}})])$ becomes a nearsighted functional of $n(\tilde{\vec{r}})$.
+Expressing $n(\tilde{\vec{r}})$ in a Taylor series, $\epsilon_{\text{xc}}$ can be thought of as a function of coefficients, which correspond to the respective terms of the expansion.
+Neglecting all terms of order $\mathcal{O}(\nabla n(\vec{r})$ results in the functional equal to LDA, which requires the function of variable $n$.
+Including the next element of the Taylor series introduces the gradient correction to the functional, which requires the function of variables $n$ and $|\nabla n|$.
+This is called the generalized gradient approximation (GGA), which expresses the exchange-correlation energy density as a function of the local density and the local gradient of the density
+\begin{equation}
+E^{\text{GGA}}_{\text{xc}}[n(\vec{r})]=\int\epsilon_{\text{xc}}(n(\vec{r}),|\nabla n(\vec{r})|)n(\vec{r}) d\vec{r}
+\text{ .}
+\end{equation}
+These functionals constitute the simplest extensions of LDA for inhomogeneous systems.
+At modest computational costs gradient-corrected functionals very often yield much better results than the LDA with respect to cohesive and binding energies.
+
+\subsection{Plane-wave basis set}
+
+Finally, a set of basis functions is required to represent the one-electron KS wave functions.
+With respect to the numerical treatment it is favorable to approximate the wave functions by linear combinations of a finite number of such basis functions.
+Covergence of the basis set, i.e. convergence of the wave functions with respect to the amount of basis functions, is most crucial for the accuracy of the numerical calulations.
+Two classes of basis sets, the plane-wave and local basis sets, exist.
+
+Local basis set functions usually are atomic orbitals, i.e. mathematical functions that describe the wave-like behavior of electrons, which are localized, i.e. centered on atoms or bonds.
+Molecular orbitals can be represented by linear combinations of atomic orbitals (LCAO).
+By construction, only a small number of basis functions is required to represent all of the electrons of each atom within reasonable accuracy.
+Thus, local basis sets enable the implementation of methods that scale linearly with the number of atoms.
+However, these methods rely on the fact that the wave functions are localized and exhibit an exponential decay resulting in a sparse Hamiltonian.
+
+Another approach is to represent the KS wave functions by plane waves.
+In fact, the employed {\textsc vasp} software is solving the KS equations within a plane-wave basis set.
+The idea is based on the Bloch theorem \cite{bloch29}, which states that in a periodic crystal each electronic wave function $\Phi_i(\vec{r})$ can be written as the product of a wave-like envelope function $\exp(i\vec{kr})$ and a function that has the same periodicity as the lattice.
+The latter one can be expressed by a Fourier series, i.e. a discrete set of plane waves whose wave vectors just correspond to reciprocal lattice vectors $\vec{G}$ of the crystal.
+Thus, the one-electron wave function $\Phi_i(\vec{r})$ associated with the wave vector $\vec{k}$ can be expanded in terms of a discrete plane-wave basis set
+\begin{equation}
+\Phi_i(\vec{r})=\sum_{\vec{G}
+%, |\vec{G}+\vec{k}|<G_{\text{cut}}}
+}c_{i,\vec{k}+\vec{G}} \exp\left(i(\vec{k}+\vec{G})\vec{r}\right)
+\text{ .}
+%E_{\text{cut}}=\frac{\hbar^2 G^2_{\text{cut}}}{2m}
+%\text{, }
+\end{equation}
+The basis set, which in principle should be infinite, can be truncated to include only plane waves that have kinetic energies $\hbar^2|\vec{k}+\vec{G}|^2/2m$ less than a particular cut-off energy $E_{\text{cut}}$.
+Although coefficients $c_{i,\vec{k}+\vec{G}}$ corresponding to small kinetic energies are typically more important, convergence with respect to the cut-off energy is crucial for the accuracy of the calculations.
+Convergence with respect to the basis set, however, is easily achieved by increasing $E_{\text{cut}}$ until the respective differences in total energy approximate zero.
+Next to their simplicity, plane waves have several advantages.
+The basis set is orthonormal by construction.
+matrix elements of the Hamiltonian have a simple form (pw rep of ks equations)
+As mentioned above ... simple to check for convergence.
+
+Disadvantage ... periodic system required, but escapable by respective choice of the supercell.
+size of matrix to diagonalize determined by cut-off energy, severe
\subsection{Pseudopotentials}
+Since core electrons tend to be concentrated very close to the atomic nuclei, resulting in large wavefunction and density gradients near the nuclei which are not easily described by a plane-wave basis set unless a very high energy cutoff, and therefore small wavelength, is used.
+
+\subsection{Brillouin zone sampling}
+
+Due to the Bloch theorem only a finite number of electronic wave functions need to be calculated for a periodic system.
+However, to calculate quantities like the total energy or charge density, these have to be evaluated in a sum over an infinite number of $\vec{k}$ points.
+Since the values of the wave function within a small interval around $\vec{k}$ are almost identical, it is possible to approximate the infinite sum by a sum over an affordable number of $k$ points, each representing the respective region of the wave function in $\vec{k}$ space.
+Methods have been derived for obtaining very accurate approximations by an intergration over special sets of $\vec{k}$ points \cite{}.
+If present, symmetries in reciprocal space may further reduce the number of calculations.
+For supercells, i.e. repeating unit cells that contain several primitive cells, sampling of the Brillouin zone restricted to the $\Gamma$ point can be quite accurately used, which is equivalent to calculating a single primitive cell using multiple $\vec{k}$ points.
+
+\subsection{Hellmann-Feynman forces}
+
\section{Modeling of defects}
\label{section:basics:defects}
projects / lectures / latex.git / blobdiff