The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Propagators for the time-dependent Kohn–Sham equations
Open accessAbstract
In this paper we address the problem of the numerical integration of the time-dependent Schrödinger equation i∂tφ=Ĥφ. In particular, we are concerned with the important case where Ĥ is the self-consistent Kohn–Sham Hamiltonian that stems from time-dependent functional theory. As the Kohn–Sham potential depends parametrically on the time-dependent density, Ĥ is in general time dependent, even in the absence of an external time-dependent field. The present analysis also holds for the description of the excited state dynamics of a many-electron system under the influence of arbitrary external time-dependent electromagnetic fields. Our discussion is separated in two parts: (i) First, we look at several algorithms to approximate exp(Â), where  is a time-independent operator [e.g., Â=−iΔtĤ(τ) for some given time τ]. In particular, polynomial expansions, projection in Krylov subspaces, and split-operator methods are investigated. (ii) We then discuss different approximations for the time-evolution operator, such as the midpoint and implicit rules, and Magnus expansions. Split-operator techniques can also be modified to approximate the full time-dependent propagator. As the Hamiltonian is time dependent, problem (ii) is not equivalent to (i). All these techniques have been implemented and tested in our computer code OCTOPUS, but can be of general use in other frameworks and implementations.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Density-Functional Theory for Time-Dependent Systems
Runge, E., & Gross, E. K. U. (1984) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.52.997 · Cited by 8,914
Electronic excitations: density-functional versus many-body Green’s-function approaches
Onida, G., Reining, L., & Rubio, A. (2002) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.74.601 · Cited by 4,155
Nineteen Dubious Ways to Compute the Exponential of a Matrix, Twenty-Five Years Later
Moler, C., & Van Loan, C. (2003) · SIAM Review · doi:10.1137/s00361445024180 · Cited by 2,357
Cited by
Andrea Rozzi, C., Maria Falke, S., Spallanzani, N., Rubio, A., Molinari, E., Brida, D., Maiuri, M., Cerullo, G., Schramm, H., Christoffers, J., et al. (2013) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms2603 · Cited by 282
Self-citationBabbush, R., Huggins, W. J., Berry, D. W., Ung, S. F., Zhao, A., Reichman, D. R., Neven, H., Baczewski, A. D., & Lee, J. (2023) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-39024-0 · Cited by 32
Computational complexity of time-dependent density functional theory
Whitfield, J. D., Yung, M.-H., Tempel, D. G., Boixo, S., & Aspuru-Guzik, A. (2014) · New Journal of Physics · doi:10.1088/1367-2630/16/8/083035 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- Castro, A., Marques, M. A. L., & Rubio, A.
- Venue
- The Journal of Chemical Physics
- Publisher
- AIP Publishing
- Published
- 2004-08-22
- Volume
- 121
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 3425-3433
- ISSN
- 0021-9606 (ISSN-L)
- 1089-7690
- OpenAlex
- W2086806986
- Cited by
- 599
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 12.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.