7
$\begingroup$

The motivation for this question is similar in nature to the series of questions on different methods :

The answers to these questions were really insightful, so I am looking for an answer that briefly describes the different variants of Perturbation Theory (PT), and the context in which they are applied on different electronic structure methods.

Rayleigh-Schrodinger perturbation theory (RSPT) is the most common form that is used, but there's also the Lennard-Jones-Brillouin-Wigner perturbation theory (BWPT). In fact, RSPT could be derived from BWPT. Again, depending the type of partitioning of the Hamiltonian, there are two variants: Moller-Plesset and Epstein-Nesbet. Then there are also many-body and diagrammatic PT. These methods have also been applied with both multi and single reference schemes as well as multi-configurational methods.

Here are a few examples of such methods:

  • Second order corrections to ground state energies(the standard MPn methods)
  • Perturbative corrections to CI (see for example CIS(D) by Martin Head-Gordon et al)
  • CASPT2 (multireference second-order PT)
$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

Moller-Plesset (MPn)

Moller-Plesset perturbation theory combines the Rayleigh-Schrodinger style of perturbation expansion with a particular partitioning of the molecular Hamiltonian in order to compute the correlation energy (and/or perturbed wavefunctions).

We express the Hamiltonian $H$ as an unperturbed part $H_0$ and a perturbation $V$. For the unperturbed part, we choose a sum of Fock operators for each electron: $$H_0=\sum_i^Nf(i) = \sum_i^N h(i)+v^\text{HF}(i)$$ This is a convenient choice because the HF wavefunction is an exact eigenfunction of this Hamiltonian, $E_0^{(0)}=\sum_i^N \epsilon_i$.

This would correspond to MP0, which is never used on its own because it's a very poor prediction for the energy that can be easily (at least conceptually) improved on. To do this, we express the wavefunction and energy as perturbative expansions:

$$H=H_0+\lambda V$$ $$\Psi_0=\Psi_0^{(0)}+\lambda \Psi_0^{(1)}+\lambda^2\Psi_0^{(2)}+...$$ $$E_0=E_0^{(0)}+\lambda E_0^{(1)}+\lambda^2E_0^{(2)}+...$$

By plugging these expressions into the Schrodinger equation and separating by order (i.e how many factors of $\lambda$ are in each term), we get a series of energy/wavefunction contributions that ideally converge to the true values for an infinite order expansion (practically, we are hoping for very good convergence with just a few terms included).

This leads to a general form for the correction terms to the energy: $$E_0^{(n)}=\langle\Psi_0^{(0)}|V|\Psi_0^{(n-1)}\rangle$$ The general form for the wavefunction corrections is more involved, but the form for a given order is not conceptually difficult to obtain.

Now we introduce the particular perturbation for MP $$V=\sum_{i<j}r_{ij}^{-1}- \sum_iv^\text{HF}(i)$$

With $V$ we can explicitly compute a few orders of energy corrections and we call the resulting energy summing up to that order the MPn energy. MP1 is actually just the Hartree-Fock energy, so it takes until MP2 before we get a nontrivial result for our effort.

MPn methods are potentially useful whenever you need to include correlation effects. On the other hand, MPn calculations scale as $O(N^{3+n})$, making higher order expansions impractical for most systems (and often worse accuracy than comparably scaling coupled cluster methods). MP2 sees the most widespread use due to having a good balance of cost and accuracy. While DFT has started to take some of the work formerly reserved, MP2 still sees use both as an individual method and as a correction to DFT in double hybrid functionals.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the answer! Your answer covers MP, would you also like to comment on the Epstein-Nesbet variant which differs from MP, in the way the $H_0$ is chosen. $\endgroup$ Nov 8 '21 at 7:00
  • $\begingroup$ EverydayFoolish, we usually try to write only one answer per question. I'm sure EN will be covered soon though! $\endgroup$ Nov 8 '21 at 10:39
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks! But, this post hasn't gotten any traction, do you have any suggestions to edit this ? $\endgroup$ Nov 12 '21 at 13:08

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.