Abstract
Free full text
A numerical projection technique for large-scale eigenvalue problems
Abstract
We present a new numerical technique to solve large-scale eigenvalue problems. It is based on the projection technique, used in strongly correlated quantum many-body systems, where first an effective approximate model of smaller complexity is constructed by projecting out high energy degrees of freedom and in turn solving the resulting model by some standard eigenvalue solver.
Here we introduce a generalization of this idea, where both steps are performed numerically and which in contrast to the standard projection technique converges in principle to the exact eigenvalues. This approach is not just applicable to eigenvalue problems encountered in many-body systems but also in other areas of research that result in large-scale eigenvalue problems for matrices which have, roughly speaking, mostly a pronounced dominant diagonal part. We will present detailed studies of the approach guided by two many-body models.
Highlights
► We present a new numerical technique to solve large-scale eigenvalue problems. ► It is based on the projection technique of strongly-correlated quantum physics. ► The method performs the projection numerically. ► It converges in principle to the exact eigenvalues. ► We present detailed studies of the approach guided by two many-body models.
1. Introduction
The solution of large, sparse eigenvalue problems is an important task in engineering, mathematics, and physics, particularly in the field of strongly correlated quantum many-body systems, such as the high-
To begin with, algebraic eigensolvers like the Lanczos and Arnoldi methods [1,2] play an important role in many-body physics as well as in many other research areas, mainly due to the fact that they are widely applicable, simple, effective and they yield numerically exact results. Implementations of the methods can be obtained from the Internet, e.g. the well-known ARPACK1 routine which includes an implicitly restarting Arnoldi algorithm. On the downside, only comparably small systems can be treated by these techniques. For most problems in quantum many-body physics, the corresponding geometric sizes are much too small.
A couple of sophisticated numerical methods have been developed for such systems in recent years. The density matrix renormalization group (DMRG) [3] is a powerful algorithm for the determination of ground state properties of large systems, which are not algebraically feasible. Recently the approach has been embedded into a wider mathematical framework, the matrix product states (MPS, [4]). The approach is limited to 1D or quasi-1D systems. Another method is the cluster perturbation theory (CPT, [5]), which constructs approximations to the Greenʼs function of infinite systems in 1, 2, and 3 dimensions by exact treatment of small clusters and combining them by perturbation theory. An extension of CPT represents the variational cluster approach (VCA, [6]) which improves the results by introducing variational parameters. An approach without systematic errors is given by the family of quantum Monte-Carlo techniques (QMC, [7]). QMC simulations, which are based on high-dimensional random samples of some suitable probability-density function have a statistical error which declines with the sample size. They are applicable to fairly large systems and to finite temperatures. The drawback of these methods is the so-called sign-problem, that shows up especially in fermionic models and which makes certain models or parameter regimes inaccessible [8]. The methods discussed so far are particularly tailored for quantum many-body problems and cannot be applied easily, if at all, to matrices of other applications.
The methods for strongly correlated quantum many-body systems rely on the assumption that the model has only a few rather local degrees of freedom. Real ab-initio models for strongly correlated quantum many-body systems are out of reach in any case, and it is inevitable to reduce the complexity of the system upon describing the key physical properties by a few effective degrees of freedom, like in the multi-band Hubbard model [9]. In many cases, these models are still too complicated and cannot be solved reliably neither analytically nor numerically. For these cases it has been proven very useful to construct effective Hamiltonians like the Heisenberg- or tJ-model. They are obtained via the projection technique [9,10] upon integrating out such basis vectors which correspond to high energy excitations, or rather which have very large diagonal matrix elements in a suitable basis. Of course, it is desirable that the quantitative results of the effective model are close to those of the original model. But more than that, it is the qualitative generic physics of strongly correlated fermions at low energies, which one wants to understand. Since the original model itself is tailored for that purpose and is already a crude approximation of the underlying ab-initio Hamiltonian, it suffices to have an effective model that still includes the key physical ingredients in order to describe competing effects of strongly correlated quantum many-body systems. The standard projection technique defines the space of dynamical variables (basis vectors) which are of crucial importance for the low lying eigenvalues, which are marked by small interaction energy (small diagonal matrix elements). The residual dynamical variables (basis vectors) are treated in second order perturbation theory. If the model contains too complicated terms, such as the density assisted next-nearest neighbor hopping in the tJ-model, they are omitted. The resulting model has a significantly reduced configuration space and is solved by one of the above mentioned techniques.
Here we present a numerical scheme, that represents a threefold generalization of the projection technique: (a) it combines the two steps of the construction of the effective model and exact diagonalization, (b) no approximations are made as far as the effective model is concerned and (c) it allows a systemic inclusion of higher order terms up to the convergence to the exact result. The projection step is based on the Schur complement and results in a non-linear eigenvalue problem, which is solved exactly.
The numerical projection technique (NPT), that shall be discussed in this paper, has several advantages. First of all, it is not necessary to formulate an explicit effective Hamiltonian, which is not trivial in more complex models involving several bands and other degrees of freedom than just charge carriers [11]. And last but not least, NPT allows to systematically go to higher orders, which becomes necessary if the coupling strength is merely moderate.
NPT is applicable to other large-scale eigenvalue problems as well. The underlying matrix has to be sparse and the diagonal elements, after suitable spectral shift, have to fulfill the following criterion: a few diagonal elements are zero or small and the vast majority of the diagonal elements is (much) greater than the sum of the respective off-diagonal elements.
The method is demonstrated by application to two representative problems of strongly-correlated quantum many-body physics, the spinless fermion model with nearest neighbor repulsion and the drosophila of solid state physicists: the Hubbard model with a local Coulomb repulsion. These models are used for benchmark purposes only and it is not the goal of the present paper to provide a detailed discussion of the fascinating physics described by these models.
The outline of the paper is as follows. In the second section we present the two benchmark models. The numerical projection technique is introduced in detail in the third section and analyzed in the following section. A further extension of the algorithm to improve the accuracy will be presented in Section 5, Section 6 will show results for the Hubbard model and concluding remarks will be given in the last section.
2. Model systems and basic idea
The approach that we present below is generally applicable if the matrix, for which the lowest eigenvalues shall be determined, can be split into parts of increasing diagonal dominance. What this means in detail will be clarified using two examples of the realm of many-body physics, the spinless fermion model with strong nearest neighbor interaction and the Hubbard model for fermions. Both models are tailored to study effects of strong correlations of electronic systems, such as the Mott-insulators [12], high temperature superconductors [13], manganites [14], just to name a few of the very many novel materials with fascinating many-body effects. The Hamiltonian of the spinless fermion model reads
where
In the case of the Hubbard model, the spin degree of freedom is also taken into account and the Hamiltonian reads
The creation (annihilation) operators
The physical behavior of both models is determined by the relative strength of the hopping parameter t and the two interaction parameters U, which stands for the on-site Coulomb repulsion between fermions of opposite spin, and V, which represents the repulsive nearest-neighbor interaction. In order to simplify the discussion we denote both parameters by V. In both cases the most interesting case is that of (almost) half-filling. That is, the number of particles in the system is half the maximum capacity, which is L in the spinless fermion model and 2L in the Hubbard model. Both models are particularly interesting in the strong coupling case, i.e. for
For both models we use the occupation number basis in real space in which the interaction part is diagonal and has a value
In this paper, we exploit this idea numerically and generalize it in such a way, that the influence of high sectors is taken into account recursively without the need of leaving terms out that in standard projection technique would complicate the resulting effective Hamiltonian. For obvious reasons we will refer to this approach as numerical projection technique (NPT).
3. Numerical projection technique
In order to exploit the NPT, we reorder the basis vectors according to
Note, that the hopping of a particle can only change the number
3.1. Projection step
We start out with a general projection based idea for solving an eigenvalue problem of a
The blocks correspond to some suitable partitions of the vector space under consideration. The sizes of the two partitions shall be denoted by
We assume that A and E are ‘small’ compared to B, such that the lowest eigenvalue of
resulting in
with
Inserting
Note that this equation is in principle exact, no approximations have been made so far. The original problem (Eq. (1)) has thus been projected into the subspace of the first partition which is of smaller size, but at the prize of a non-linear eigenvalue problem. By the above procedure we obtain only those eigenvectors
3.2. Solution of the non-linear eigenvalue problem
In the numerical projection technique, to be outlined below, the second partition will consist of a single sector. Hence B will be the sub-matrix of the Hamiltonian corresponding to basis vectors of that particular sector and it will consist of a kinetic term and an interaction term,
and the calculation of
Note that the expressions
This expansion can also be used in Eq. (2) in order to evaluate the second part of the eigenvector, i.e.
The non-linear eigenvalue problem can now be solved iteratively, by using an initial approximation for λ to build
A more sophisticated approach to obtain an improved value for λ is provided by the Newton–Raphson method. We are actually seeking the roots of
The expression shows that this can be transformed to an equation of form
Note that in the simple iteration scheme
The derivative of
which, like Eq. (4), can be expressed in a Taylor expansion
As before, the stored matrices
3.3. Iterative inclusion of higher sectors
Now we are in the position to describe the numerical projection technique. To begin with, we consider the following two partitions: the first partition may contain the lowest sectors
- (a)
We begin with the first partition, solve the eigenvalue problem for
and determine the corresponding unitary matrix containing the corresponding eigenvectors. - (b)
The matrix for the first two partitions has the following block structure
- (c)
Next we perform a unitary transformation on
provided by the unitary matrix resulting in(7)with
being a -dimensional diagonal matrix. - (d)
Now we solve the eigenvalue problem for
as outlined in the previous section and construct the eigenvector matrix for the entire matrix :with I being an identity matrix of appropriate size. As discussed before
only contains the lowest eigenvectors. Consequently, is again a -dimensional diagonal matrix. - (e)
Finally we include the blocks
and of the next sector and perform again a unitary transformation with as in Eq. (7) leading to
The recursion steps (d) and (e) are continued until the desired accuracy is reached.
3.4. Truncation of the first partition
The advantage of the numerical projection technique so far is the fact that (non-linear) eigenvalue problems have to be solved for matrices of a size given by the first partition
It may happen that the first partition, even if it covers merely the first sector, is still very large. This is the case in the Hubbard model, where already the lowest sector for
We will use a predefined value
4. Numerical experiments
We begin with the spinless fermion model with periodic boundary condition (pbc) at half-filling. Due to the conservation of the total momentum k only those basis vectors with the same k need to be taken into account. For the spinless fermion model at half-filling the ground state is degenerate and has
To begin with, we choose as first partition the first sector with
Table 1 exhibits a comparison of the run time for various system sizes. It can be seen that NPT is significantly faster than the highly optimized ARPACK routine (Arnoldi implementation) for increasing system size. We observe that even for
Table 1
L | M | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
16 | 12 870 | 0.0 | 0.2 | −1.57 | 0.007 |
18 | 48 620 | 0.0 | 0.8 | −1.76 | 0.010 |
20 | 184 756 | 0.1 | 4.1 | −1.95 | 0.012 |
22 | 705 432 | 0.3 | 10.4 | −2.14 | 0.014 |
24 | 2 704 156 | 0.6 | 87.1 | −2.33 | 0.014 |
4.1. Dependence on the size of the initial partition
We observe that the convergence of the eigenvalue levels off at a moderate relative accuracy of 1 percent when the initial partitions consist only of the first sector (
One way to increase the accuracy is to choose a greater initial partition upon including all sectors up to
4.2. Dependence on the truncation size
So far we have seen that the accuracy is limited when the truncation size is restricted to 2, even if the size of the initial partition is increased and all sectors are iteratively included. One is therefore driven to study the dependence on the truncation size. To this end we consider one particular system (
Table 2
2 | −1.9565 | 0.012 | 0.66 |
4 | −1.9573 | 0.011 | 1.34 |
6 | −1.9594 | 0.010 | 2.25 |
10 | −1.9629 | 0.008 | 3.76 |
14 | −1.9713 | 0.004 | 6.79 |
16 | −1.9749 | 0.003 | 9.21 |
3 sectors | −1.9793 | 0.001 | |
exact | −1.9800 |
5. Three-partition projection
As discussed in the introduction, the central goal of the projection techniques is to describe the low-lying generic physics of the original quantum many-body system. We have seen, that NPT as opposed to standard projection techniques resulting in effective models, even yields quantitatively good agreement with the result of the original model. If still higher accuracy is the ultimate goal, then one can do even better then what has been discussed so far. It is possible to include in each recursion step two sectors at a time with little more CPU effort. To this end we consider a matrix which has
Here, an equivalent relation to Eq. (3) can be obtained:
The contribution of the matrix C shall be expanded up to the linear inverse term:
Again, the expression is expanded in terms of the kinetic part:
Using this extension, the numerical result can be improved by orders of magnitude as is shown in Fig. 4. The results are for the spinless fermion model at strong coupling
6. Results for the Hubbard model
Next we present some results for the Hubbard model. Standard projection technique leads in the case of half-filling to the Heisenberg model and away from half-filling to the tJ-model [9]. These models correspond in NPT to the situation that the initial partition is the first sector with
Table 3
System | Model | ||
---|---|---|---|
Hubbard | −2.1767 | ||
NPT ( | −2.1526 | 0.0110 | |
Heisenberg | −2.2604 | 0.0385 | |
Hubbard | −2.7037 | ||
NPT ( | −2.6572 | 0.0172 | |
Heisenberg | −2.8062 | 0.0379 | |
Hubbard | −5.6698 | ||
NPT ( | −5.7303 | 0.0107 | |
tJ | −5.5282 | 0.0250 | |
Hubbard | −4.9334 | ||
NPT ( | −4.6032 | 0.0669 | |
Heisenberg | −5.6123 | 0.1376 |
We compare NPT results and those of the effective models with the exact lowest eigenvalue of the Hubbard model. We see that even in the strong coupling case (
7. Conclusions
The numerical projection technique (NPT), presented in this paper, is a numerical generalization of standard projection technique, routinely used to derive effective models for qualitative description of the generic low-energy physics of strongly correlated systems. The standard projection technique corresponds to an approximate evaluation of second order perturbation theory in the inverse interaction parameter.
NPT is on the one hand a systematic application of the projection techniques to any many-body Hamiltonian, irrespective of the complexity of the original model, also in cases where the analytic approach would lead to unmanageable effective models. On the other hand it is also applicable for moderate coupling parameters, where second order perturbation theory is not reliable enough.
We have demonstrated that NPT yields fairly accurate results with little CPU-effort as compared to state-of-the-art exact diagonalization. Furthermore, by solving the non-linear eigenvalue problem and including higher order terms the approach yields significantly better results than traditional projection technique.
Footnotes
1http://www.caam.rice.edu/software/ARPACK/.
2We keep both, to allow real valued matrices and eigenvectors.
References
Full text links
Read article at publisher's site: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2011.05.016
Read article for free, from open access legal sources, via Unpaywall: https://europepmc.org/articles/pmc3160753
Similar Articles
To arrive at the top five similar articles we use a word-weighted algorithm to compare words from the Title and Abstract of each citation.
Restarting iterative projection methods for Hermitian nonlinear eigenvalue problems with minmax property.
Numer Math (Heidelb), 135(2):397-430, 14 May 2016
Cited by: 0 articles | PMID: 28615742 | PMCID: PMC5445551
Solving complex eigenvalue problems on a quantum annealer with applications to quantum scattering resonances.
Phys Chem Chem Phys, 22(45):26136-26144, 01 Nov 2020
Cited by: 6 articles | PMID: 33047749
EvArnoldi: A New Algorithm for Large-Scale Eigenvalue Problems.
J Phys Chem A, 120(19):3366-3371, 08 Apr 2016
Cited by: 0 articles | PMID: 27015379
A variational eigenvalue solver on a photonic quantum processor.
Nat Commun, 5:4213, 23 Jul 2014
Cited by: 177 articles | PMID: 25055053 | PMCID: PMC4124861
The ELPA library: scalable parallel eigenvalue solutions for electronic structure theory and computational science.
J Phys Condens Matter, 26(21):213201, 02 May 2014
Cited by: 23 articles | PMID: 24786764
Review