7
$\begingroup$

I am thinking about one question. If the Hamiltonian matrix is based on the non-orthogonal basis, how to compute the charge conductance with the Non-Equilibrium Green's Function (NEGF) method.

Suppose the Hamiltonian of the system is denoted by $H$ and the overlap matrix is denoted by $S$. They are written below.

\begin{align}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\left(\varepsilon_{F}+i\right)S-H&=\varepsilon^{'}S-H\tag{1}\\ &=\begin{pmatrix} \varepsilon^{'}S_{ll}-H_{ll}&\varepsilon^{'}S_{ls}-H_{ls}&0\tag{2}\\ \varepsilon^{'}\times S_{sl}-H_{sl}&\varepsilon^{'} S_{ss}-H_{ss}&\varepsilon^{'} S_{sr}-H_{sr}\\0&\varepsilon^{'} S_{rs}-H_{rs}&\varepsilon^{'} S_{rr}-H_{rr} \end{pmatrix}\\ &=\begin{pmatrix}H^{'}_{ll}&H^{'}_{ls}&0\\H^{'}_{sl}&H^{'}_{ss}&H^{'}_{sr}\\0&H^{'}_{rs}&H^{'}_{rr}\end{pmatrix}.\tag{3} \end{align}

Here, $\varepsilon_{F}$ is the Fermi energy level of the central scattering zone and $i$ is the imaginary number.

\begin{align} G_{ll}&=\left[H^{'}_{ll}\right]^{-1}\tag{4} \\ G_{rr}&=\left[H^{'}_{rr}\right]^{-1}\tag{5} \\ \Gamma_\text{left}&=H^{'}_{sl} G_{ll} H^{'}_{ls}\tag{6} \\ \Gamma_\text{right}&=H^{'}_{sr} G_{ll} H^{'}_{rs}\tag{7} \end{align}

Self energy for the left and right leads and the green function for the scattering zone are written below: \begin{align} \Sigma_\text{left}&=i \times \left[\Gamma_\text{left}-\left(\Gamma_\text{left}\right)^{+}\right] \tag{8} \\ \Sigma_\text{right}&=i \times \left[\Gamma_\text{right}-\left(\Gamma_\text{right}\right)^{+}\right]\tag{9} \\ G_{ss}^{R}&=\left[H^{'}_{ss}-\Gamma_\text{left}-\Gamma_\text{right}\right]^{-1}\tag{10} \\ G_{ss}^{A}&=\left(G_{ss}^{R}\right)^{+}\tag{11} \end{align}

Then, the charge conductance is written below:

$$G_{k}=\frac{2e^{2}}{h}\mathrm{Tr}\left[\Sigma_\text{left}G_{ss}^{A}\Sigma_\text{right}G_{ss}\right]\tag{12}$$

This conductance is only for one single k point in the reciprocal space. The total charge conductance is the integral of this single-k-point-conductance over the whole first Brillouin zone.

$$G_{\textrm{total}}=\frac{e}{h}\int G_{k}\times \left[f_{(\varepsilon_{F}-\mu_\text{left})}-f_{(\varepsilon_{F}-\mu_\text{right})}\right]d_{k}\tag{13}$$

where, $f_{(\varepsilon_{F}-\mu_\text{left})}$ and $f_{(\varepsilon_{F}-\mu_\text{right})}$ are Fermi-Dirac distribution function for left and right leads with the chemical potential $\mu_\text{left}$ and $\mu_\text{right}$ for the left and right leads.

To calculate the surface green function in equation (4) and (5), I used the Sancho's method.[1]

The final conductivity value, $G_{\textrm{total}}$, is only correct at the $\Gamma$ point in the reciprocal space, but wrong at other k points.

I checked the internal output data and found that the calculation of the Surface Green's function was not right, since some data was NaN type. I guess this is because I did not use the correct way to avoid the singular matrix in the Surface Green's function calculation step.

Would anyone please give me some suggestions on the solution?




References

  1. M. P. L. Sancho, J. M. L. Sancho and J, Rubio, Highly convergent schemes for the calculation of bulk and surface Green functions, J. Phys. F: Met. Phys. 15 (1985) 851-858.
$\endgroup$
24
  • $\begingroup$ I gave my +1 long ago, but can you update us now that it has been 6+ months since you asked this question? Have you found the answer? Are you still actively in need of an answer? Also, it would be nice for you to number all of your equations (even if they are never referenced, so that when other people are referencing them, they can say "Eq. 6 of this MMSE question", rather than "the sixth equation in this MMSE question"). Also $G_{\rm{total}}$ looks better than $G_{total}$ so fi you can fix the subscripts for words like "total", "right" and "left", that would be helpful! $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 5, 2023 at 14:39
  • $\begingroup$ @Nike Thank you for the comment. Yes, I still need an answer. At this moment, I have successfully programmed NEGF method to compute the conductivity at Gamma point in the reciprocal space; however, I found that conductivity value is wrong at other k point in the reciprocal space. I checked the internal output data and found that the calculation of the surface green function was not right since some data was 'NaN' type. I guess this is because I did not use the correct way to avoid the singular matrix in the surface green function calculation step. Would anyone please give me some suggestions? $\endgroup$
    – Kieran
    Commented Nov 8, 2023 at 13:43
  • $\begingroup$ @Nike On the other hand, I am not acquainted with Latex command. I do not know how to add equation number and change the font of $G_{total}$ as you suggested. Would you please help me modify it? Thank you. $\endgroup$
    – Kieran
    Commented Nov 8, 2023 at 13:45
  • $\begingroup$ You can use \tag{5} to number an equation with the number 5. For subscripts in Roman font, you can use \textrm{} around the text. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 8, 2023 at 14:49
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think your imaginary value looks correct. A shift of the energy into the complex plane is all that is needed. 1e-4 seems fine. If the shift was wrong, then the Gamma-point would also yield wrong results. I would still think you do something wrong in the k-point setup. But I don't know, from the looks of it, there is nothing wrong. $\endgroup$
    – nickpapior
    Commented Dec 4, 2023 at 7:54

0

You must log in to answer this question.