20
SCAN META-GGA: THE PREDICTIVE POWER OF 17 EXACT CONSTRAINTS JOHN P. PERDEW DEPARMENTS OF PHYSICS AND CHEMISTRY TEMPLE UNIVERSITY, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19122 USA ES17, Princeton U., JUNE 27, 2017 SUPPORTED BY NSF-DMR, AND BY DOE-BES THROUGH THE ENERGY FRONTIER RESEARCH CENTER CCDM.

SCAN META-GGA: THE PREDICTIVE POWER OF 17 EXACT …mcc.illinois.edu/workshops/electronicstructure/2017/talks/ES_2017_Perdew.pdfscan meta-gga: the predictive power of 17 exact constraints

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    7

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • SCAN META-GGA: THE PREDICTIVE POWER OF 17 EXACT CONSTRAINTS

    JOHN P. PERDEW

    DEPARMENTS OF PHYSICS AND CHEMISTRY

    TEMPLE UNIVERSITY, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19122 USA

    ES17, Princeton U., JUNE 27, 2017

    SUPPORTED BY NSF-DMR, AND BY DOE-BES THROUGH THE

    ENERGY FRONTIER RESEARCH CENTER CCDM.

  • THE RIGHT ANSWER FOR THE RIGHT REASON AT THE RIGHT PRICE.

    NOT AN IMPOSSIBLE DREAM!

  • HOW CAN WE APPROXIMATE THE DENSITY FUNCTIONAL FOR THE EXCHANGE-CORRELATION ENERGY?

    IT IS OFTEN BUT INCORRECTLY SAID THAT β€œTHERE IS NO SYSTEMATIC WAY TO CONSTRUCT A DENSITY-FUNCTIONAL APPROXIMATION”.

    THERE IS A SYSTEMATIC OR β€œPHYSICS” WAY THAT PRODUCES EXTRAPOLATIVE OR PREDICTIVE FUNCTIONALS.

    THERE IS ALSO A β€œPHYTTING” WAY THAT PRODUCES MAINLY INTERPOLATIVE FUNCTIONALS.

  • FIVE STEPS TO A PHYSICS-BASED DFT APPROXIMATION

    (I) PROVE THE EXISTENCE OF THE EXACT DENSITY FUNCTIONAL, AND DERIVE EXACT FORMAL EXPRESSIONS FOR IT.

    (II) DISCOVER MATHEMATICAL PROPERTIES OF THE EXACT FUNCTIONAL (EXACT CONSTRAINTS), INCLUDING LIMITS, SCALING RELATIONS, EQUALITIES, AND BOUNDS.

  • (III) DEVELOP APPROXIMATE BUT COMPUTATIONALLY TRACTABLE FORMS FOR THE APPROXIMATIONS AT VARIOUS LEVELS OF FLEXIBILITY: ADD INGREDIENTS (LSDA, GGA, META-GGA, HYBRID, RPA-LIKE)

    (IV) IMPOSE THE EXACT CONSTRAINTS FROM STEP (II) ON A GIVEN FORM, AS APPROPRIATE.

    (V) IF A FORM RETAINS SOME FLEXIBILITY, FIT TO APPROPRIATE NORMS, NON-BONDED SYSTEMS FOR WHICH THE FORM CAN BE EXPECTED TO BE ACCURATE.

    ALL EXACT CONSTRAINTS ARE CREATED EQUAL, AND ENDOWED BY THEIR CREATOR WITH THE RIGHT TO BE SATISFIED.

  • STRONGLY CONSTRAINED AND APPROPRIATELY NORMED (SCAN) META-GENERALIZED

    GRADIENT APPROXIMATION FOR EXCHANGE AND CORRELATION

    CONSTRUCTED VIA STEPS (I)-(V). SATISFIES ALL 17 KNOWN EXACT CONSTRAINTS THAT A META-GGA CAN SATISFY. ITS ACCURACY FOR DIVERSELY-BONDED SYSTEMS CONFIRMS

    STEPS (I)-(V).

    J. SUN, A. RUZSINSZKY, AND J.P. PERDEW, PRL 2015J. SUN ET AL., NATURE CHEMISTRY 2016

  • THE 17 EXACT CONSTRAINTS SATISFIED BY SCAN.

    AN ASTERISK INDICATES THE 11 EXACT CONSTRAINTS SATISFIED BY PBE.

    FOR EXCHANGE:

    *1. NEGATIVITY

    *2. SPIN SCALING EQUALITY

    *3. UNIFORM DENSITY SCALING

    4. FOURTH-ORDER GRADIENT EXPANSION

    5. FINITE NON-UNIFORM SCALING LIMIT

    6. TIGHT LOWER BOUND FOR TWO-ELECTRON DENSITIES

  • FOR CORRELATION:

    *7. NON-POSITIVITY

    *8. SECOND-ORDER GRADIENT EXPANSION

    *9. UNIFORM DENSITY SCALING TO THE HIGH-DENSITY LIMIT

    *10. UNIFORM DENSITY SCALING TO THE LOW-DENSITY LIMIT

    11. ZERO CORRELATION ENERGY FOR ONE-ELECTRON DENSITIES

    12. FINITE NON-UNIFORM SCALING LIMIT

    FOR BOTH:

    *13. SIZE EXTENSIVITY

    *14. GENERAL LIEB-OXFORD LOWER BOUND

    *15. WEAK SPIN-POLARIZATION DEPENDENCE IN LOW-DENSITY LIMIT

    *16. STATIC LINEAR RESPONSE OF THE UNIFORM GAS

    17. LIEB-OXFORD LOWER BOUND FOR TWO-ELECTRON DENSITIES

  • INTRODUCTION TO META-GGA

    THE ROLE OF 𝜏 (SPIN SUPPRESSED)

    β€’ LIMITING FORMS:

    β€’ SINGLE-ORBITAL SYSTEMS:

    πœπ‘€ =1

    8|𝛻𝑛|2/𝑛

    β€’ UNIFORM ELECTRON GAS (UEG):

    πœπ‘’π‘›π‘–π‘“ =3

    10(3πœ‹2)2/3𝑛5/3

    REGION 𝛼

    SINGLE ORBITAL (COVALENT) 0

    SLOWLY-VARYING DENSITY (METALLIC)

    ~1

    OVERLAP OF CLOSED SHELLS (NONCOVALENT)

    >>1

    RIGHT DIMENSIONLESS INGREDIENT FOR MGGA: 𝛼 =πœβˆ’πœπ‘€

    πœπ‘’π‘›π‘–π‘“

    ),,,,,(],[ 3

    nnnnrndnnE xcxcEFFICIENT SEMILOCAL APPROXIMATIONS TO 𝐸π‘₯𝑐:

    β€’ LSDA: π‘›πœŽ = Οƒπ‘–π‘œπ‘π‘π‘’π‘

    |πœ“π‘–,𝜎|2

    β€’ GGA: ADDS 𝛻𝑛↑ AND 𝛻𝑛↓‒ MGGA: ADDS 𝜏𝜎 = σ𝑖

    π‘œπ‘π‘π‘’π‘ 1

    2|π›»πœ“π‘–,𝜎|

    2

    β€’ πœ“π‘–,𝜎 ∢ KOHN βˆ’ SHAM ORBITALS

  • G3 (kcal/mol) BH76 (kcal/mol)

    S22 (kcal/mol) LC20 (β„«)

    ME MAE ME MAE ME MAE ME MAE

    GGA

    PBE 22.2 9.2 2.8 0.059

    MGGA SCAN - 5.7 7.7 - 0.9 0.016

    -

    EARLY RESULTS FOR MOLECULES AND SOLIDS

    MAE: MEAN ABSOLUTE ERROR

    G3: ATOMIZATION ENERGIES OF 223 MOLECULES

    BH76: 76 REACTION BARRIERS

    S22: 22 MOLECULAR COMPLEXES BOUND BY WEAK BONDS

    LC20: LATTICE CONSTANTS OF 20 SOLIDS INCLUDING METALS, SEMICONDUCTORS, AND INSULATORS

  • THE NONEMPIRICAL SCAN META-GGA IS MORE ACCURATE THAN THE NONEMPIRICAL PBE GGA, ESPECIALLY FOR WEAK BONDS AND INTERMEDIATE-RANGE VAN DER WAALS ATTRACTION. (SOFT MATTER AS WELL AS HARD!)

    NOTE THAT SCAN IS NOT FITTED TO ANY BONDED SYSTEM. THUS ITS RESULTS FOR BONDS ARE GENUINE PREDICTIONS, NOT FITS.

  • Phase transition pressure and defect formation energies of Si: The situation before SCAN

    STRUCTURAL PHASE TRANSITIONINTERSTITIAL DEFECT FORMATION ENERGY

    REF: E.R. Batista, et al, PRB, 74, 121102 (2006)

  • PERFORMANCE OF SCAN FOR SOLID Si

    Phase transition Interstitial defect formation (eV)

    𝛿𝐸(meV) 𝑝𝑑(Gpa) X H T

    PBE 290 8.4 3.61 3.65 3.78

    SCAN 411 14.3 4.29 4.36 4.59

    Ref 480Β±50 11-15 4.5-4.8

  • ENERGETIC ORDERING OF WATER HEXAMERS(BINDING ENERGY IN meV/H2O)

    method Prism Cage Book Cyclic

    DMC 331.9 329.5 327.8 320.8

    CCSD(T) 347.6 345.5 338.9 332.5

    PBE 336.1 339.4 345.6 344.1

    SCAN 376.8 375.6 370.0 359.7

    PBE+vd

    W(TS) 369.6 372.6 370.6 360.7

    Ref: B. Santra, et al, JCP, 129, 194111 (2008)

  • ~7 ICE PHASES: CORRECT ENERGY DIFFERENCES

    LIQUID WATER BY AB INITIO MOLECULAR DYNAMICS:

    PBE OVERSTRUCTURES WATER, AND MAKES ICE SINK IN WATER. SCAN CORRECTS THESE ERRORS. WATER IS ESSENTIAL FOR CHEMISTRY AND BIOLOGY.

    TESTED FERROELECTRICS/MULTIFERROICS: SCAN MUCH BETTER THAN PBE FOR STRUCTURAL DISTORTIONS, POLARIZATIONS, AND TRANSITION TEMPERATURES.

  • STABILITIES OF CRYSTAL STRUCTURES

    WORK WITH GERD CEDER SHOWS THAT SCAN HALVES THE ERRORS OF PBE FOR FORMATION ENERGIES OF 200 BINARY SOLIDS AND FOR PREDICTION OF THE GROUND-STATE CRYSTAL STRUCTURES.

    SCAN BAND GAPS OF SOLIDS IN A GKS SCHEME ARE LESS UNDERESTIMATED THAN PBE GAPS, AND (FOR STRONGLY-CORRELATED SYSTEMS) OFTEN CLOSE TO PBE+U GAPS.

    BUT HYBRID GAPS IN GKS ARE EVEN BETTER. ALL FOR THE RIGHT REASON. (PERDEW, YANG, BURKE ET AL., PNAS, 2017)

  • NONLOCAL CORRECTIONS TO SCAN

    (1) LONG-RANGE VAN DER WAALS INTERACTION(SCAN+rVV10). IMPORTANT FOR THE EXFOLIATION ENERGIES OFLAYERED MATERIALS,

    AND FOR THE SURFACE ENERGIES AND WORK FUNCTIONS OF METALS.

    H. PENG, Z. YANG, J. SUN, & J.P. PERDEW, PHYS. REV. X (2016)

    (2) SELF-INTERACTION CORRECTION, PIECEWISE LINEARITY OF E(N), FLAT PLANE CONDITION (UNDER DEVELOPMENT).

    NEEDED FOR STRETCHED BONDS OR STRONG CORRELATION.

  • SUMMARY OF SCAN

    β€’ A META-GGA, STRONGLY CONSTRAINED AND APPROPRIATELY NORMED.

    β€’ COMPUTATIONALLY EFFICIENT AND NONEMPIRICAL. AVAILABLE IN VASP, ADF, QCHEM, QUANTUM ESPRESSO,…

    β€’ SYSTEMATIC IMPROVEMENT OVER THE PBE GGA FOR A WIDE RANGE OF PROPERTIES.

    β€’ OFTEN PERFORMS LIKE A HYBRID FUNCTIONAL, AT LOWER COST AND WITH INTERMEDIATE-RANGE VAN DER WAALS INTERACTION.

    LONG-RANGE vdW INTERACTION FROM SCAN+rVV10. SELF-INTERACTION CORRECTIONS TO SCAN (SATISFYING THE LAST KNOWN EXACT CONSTRAINTS) ARE UNDER DEVELOPMENT.

  • EXCHANGE

    EXACT CONSTRAINTS

    𝐸π‘₯𝑆𝐢𝐴𝑁 𝑛 = ࢱ𝑑3π‘Ÿπ‘›πœ€π‘₯

    𝑒𝑛𝑖𝑓(𝑛)𝐹π‘₯

    𝑆𝐢𝐴𝑁(𝑠, 𝛼)

    𝐹π‘₯𝑆𝐢𝐴𝑁 𝑠, 𝛼 = {β„Žπ‘₯

    1 𝑠, 𝛼 + 𝑓π‘₯ 𝛼 [β„Žπ‘₯0 βˆ’ β„Žπ‘₯

    1 𝑠, 𝛼 ]}𝑔π‘₯ 𝑠

    UNDETERMINED PARAMETERS: π‘˜1, 𝑐1x, 𝑐2x, 𝑑x

    1. TIGHT LOWER BOUND FOR EXCHANGE 𝐹π‘₯𝑆𝐢𝐴𝑁 ≀ 1.174 β†’ β„Žπ‘₯

    0=1.174

    3. NON-UNIFORM SCALING LIMIT: limπ‘ β†’βˆž

    𝐹π‘₯𝑆𝐢𝐴𝑁 𝑠, 𝛼 ∝ π‘ βˆ’

    1

    2 β†’ 𝑔π‘₯ 𝑠 = 1 βˆ’ 𝐸π‘₯𝑝[βˆ’π‘Ž1π‘ βˆ’1/2]

    2. 4TH-ORDER GRADIENT EXPANSION OF SLOWLY VARYING DENSITY LIMIT (𝑠 β†’0 and 𝛼 β†’1):

    𝐹π‘₯GE4 𝑠, 𝛼 = 1 +

    10

    81𝑠2 βˆ’

    1606

    18225𝑠4 +

    511

    13500𝑠2 1 βˆ’ 𝛼 +

    5913

    405000(1 βˆ’ 𝛼)2

    RESUMMATION OF 4TH-ORDER GRADIENT EXPANSION (RGE):

    β„Žπ‘₯1 𝑠, 𝛼 = 1 + π‘˜1 βˆ’

    π‘˜1

    1 +πœ‡π΄πΎπ‘ 

    2(1 +𝑏4 𝑠2/πœ‡π΄πΎπΈπ‘₯𝑝(βˆ’|𝑏4|𝑠

    2/πœ‡π΄πΎ)) + {𝑏1𝑠2 + 𝑏2 1 βˆ’ 𝛼 𝐸π‘₯𝑝 βˆ’π‘3 1 βˆ’ 𝛼

    2 }2

    π‘˜1

    π‘Ž1=4.9479: Ex(H)

    INTERPOLATION AND EXTRAPOLATION: 𝑓π‘₯ 𝛼 = 𝐸π‘₯𝑝 βˆ’π‘1x𝛼

    1βˆ’π›Όπœƒ 1 βˆ’ 𝛼 βˆ’ 𝑑x𝐸π‘₯𝑝

    𝑐2x

    1βˆ’π›Όπœƒ 𝛼 βˆ’ 1

    πœ‡π΄πΎ = 10/81, 𝑏1 =0.156632, 𝑏2 = 0.12083, 𝑏3 = 0.5, 𝑏4 =πœ‡π΄πΎ2

    π‘˜1βˆ’ 0.112654

    NO CORRECTION TO RGE IN ANY POWER OF 𝛻𝑛 AT THE SLOWLY VARYING DENSITY LIMIT

    πœƒ(π‘₯): STEP FUNCTION

    3/12 )3)(4/3()( nnunifx 3/43/12 )()3(2

    ||

    n

    ns

  • CORRELATION

    EXACT CONSTRAINTS

    UNDETERMINED PARAMETERS: 𝑐1c, 𝑐2c, 𝑑𝑐

    1. ONE ELECTRON SELF-CORRELATION FREE

    3. 2ND-ORDER GRADIENT EXPANSION OF SLOWLY VARYING DENSITY LIMIT β†’ A SIMPLIFIED PBE CORRELATION FOR πœ€π‘1

    INTERPOLATION AND EXTRAPOLATION: 𝑓𝑐 𝛼 = 𝐸π‘₯𝑝 βˆ’π‘1c𝛼

    1βˆ’π›Όπœƒ 1 βˆ’ 𝛼 βˆ’ 𝑑c𝐸π‘₯𝑝

    𝑐2c

    1βˆ’π›Όπœƒ 𝛼 βˆ’ 1

    𝐸𝑐𝑆𝐢𝐴𝑁 𝑛 = ࢱ𝑑3π‘Ÿπ‘›πœ€π‘

    𝑆𝐢𝐴𝑁 )πœ€π‘π‘†πΆπ΄π‘ = πœ€π‘

    1 + 𝑓𝑐 𝛼 (πœ€π‘0 βˆ’ πœ€π‘

    1

    2. LOWER BOUND ON 𝐸π‘₯𝑐 OF 2-ELECTRON DENSITIES: 𝐸π‘₯𝑐 𝑛 β‰₯ 1.67𝐸π‘₯𝐿𝐷𝐴

    NONEMPIRICAL πœ€π‘0

    4. NON-POSITIVITY β†’ πœ€π‘0 β‰₯ πœ€π‘

    1