pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.18973 · v1 · pith:ACEYOFT5new · submitted 2026-06-17 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el · cond-mat.mes-hall· cond-mat.supr-con· quant-ph

Emergence of Resonating Valence-Bond Correlations in Stretched Graphene

Sam Azadi , A. Principi , T. D. K\"uhne , M. S. Bahramy This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 19:09 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.supr-conquant-ph
keywords grapheneresonating valence bondquantum Monte Carloelectronic correlationsstrainDirac semimetalsinglet pairing
0
0 comments X

The pith

Stretching the graphene lattice increases the energy advantage of a resonating valence bond state over a single-determinant wave function up to a critical strain of 15-20 percent.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper examines how tensile expansion of the honeycomb lattice alters electronic correlations in graphene. It employs variational and diffusion quantum Monte Carlo to compare a standard Jastrow-Slater determinant wave function against a resonating valence bond ansatz built from Jastrow-antisymmetrized geminal products. The central result is a non-monotonic rise and fall in the energy lowering provided by the RVB description as bond lengths increase. This pattern points to a crossover from weak correlations in the Dirac semimetal to a regime dominated by short-range singlet pairings. If the pattern holds, lattice strain alone becomes a controllable knob for correlation strength in Dirac materials.

Core claim

The energy gain of the RVB state relative to the single-determinant description increases with bond expansion up to a critical strain δ_cr (15% < δ_cr < 20%) and decreases beyond it. This nonmonotonic evolution signals a transition from a weakly correlated Dirac semimetal to a regime with enhanced non-dynamic correlation and short-range singlet pairing.

What carries the argument

The RVB Jastrow-antisymmetrized geminal product ansatz, which incorporates short-range singlet pairing and yields a lower variational energy than the Jastrow-Slater determinant once the lattice is stretched.

If this is right

  • Below the critical strain the RVB description systematically lowers the total energy relative to the Slater determinant.
  • Above the critical strain the energy advantage of the RVB state shrinks, marking a reversal in the trend of correlation strength.
  • The location of the crossover coincides with the range of mechanical stability of the stretched honeycomb lattice.
  • Tensile expansion therefore supplies a direct route to enhancing non-dynamic correlations and short-range singlet pairing in graphene.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Similar strain-driven crossovers may appear in other two-dimensional Dirac materials whose bandwidth can be tuned by lattice expansion.
  • Spectroscopic signatures of the enhanced singlet correlations, such as changes in the low-energy spectral weight, could be searched for near 15-20 percent strain.
  • The non-monotonic energy difference supplies a concrete target for testing whether variational superiority of the RVB ansatz tracks the true ground-state ordering.

Load-bearing premise

The RVB geminal-product ansatz is assumed to capture the dominant correlation physics more accurately than the conventional Slater determinant when the lattice expands.

What would settle it

A higher-accuracy calculation, such as an exact diagonalization on a sufficiently large cluster or a more complete quantum Monte Carlo projection, that finds the single-determinant energy lower than the RVB energy at 18 percent strain.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.18973 by A. Principi, M. S. Bahramy, Sam Azadi, T. D. K\"uhne.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Energy difference ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. DFT band structure of graphene obtained at biaxial stretch [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. DFT project density of states (pDOS) of graphene obtained at biaxial stretch [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. VMC energy as a function of the number of optimization steps computed using JSD and JAGP wave functions for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. VMC energy as a function of the number of optimization steps computed using JSD and JAGP wave functions for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. VMC energy as a function of the number of optimization steps computed using JSD and JAGP wave functions for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Electronic correlations in graphene are generally considered weak due to the large bandwidth of its $\pi$ electrons. Here we show that tensile expansion of the honeycomb lattice provides a direct route to enhancing correlation effects. Using variational and diffusion quantum Monte Carlo, we compare a conventional Jastrow-Slater determinant wave function with a resonating-valence-bond (RVB) Jastrow-antisymmetrized geminal product ansatz for a series of stretched graphene lattices. We find that the energy gain of the RVB state relative to the single-determinant description increases with bond expansion up to a critical strain $\delta_{\mathrm{cr}}$, and decreases beyond it, revealing a nonmonotonic evolution of electronic correlations. The crossover is found to occur in the range $15\% < \delta_{\mathrm{cr}} < 20\%$, in agreement with mechanical stability limits. This behavior indicates a transition from a weakly correlated Dirac semimetal to a regime with enhanced non-dynamic correlation and short-range singlet pairing. Our results provide direct many-body evidence that lattice expansion drives graphene into a regime where RVB-like correlations become energetically favorable, offering a simple route to tuning correlation effects in Dirac materials.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that tensile expansion of the graphene honeycomb lattice enhances electronic correlations, as evidenced by variational and diffusion Monte Carlo calculations comparing a Jastrow-Slater determinant (JSD) wave function to a resonating-valence-bond Jastrow-antisymmetrized geminal product (JAGP) ansatz. The energy gain of the RVB state relative to the single-determinant description increases with bond expansion up to a critical strain δ_cr (15% < δ_cr < 20%) and decreases beyond it, indicating a transition from a weakly correlated Dirac semimetal to a regime with enhanced non-dynamic correlation and short-range singlet pairing.

Significance. If the central non-monotonic crossover holds under fixed-node projection, the work supplies direct many-body evidence that lattice strain can tune correlation effects in Dirac materials toward RVB-like physics, consistent with mechanical stability limits. The dual-ansatz comparison (JSD vs. JAGP) and use of both VMC and DMC constitute a methodological strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4 (Results) and associated figures] §4 (Results) and associated figures: the reported non-monotonic strain dependence of ΔE = E_RVB − E_JSD is extracted from the variational energies; because the JAGP and JSD ansatzes possess distinct nodal hypersurfaces, it must be shown explicitly that the peak between 15% and 20% strain survives in the fixed-node DMC energies (the abstract states both methods are used, yet the crossover is not confirmed to persist after projection).
  2. [§3 (Computational methods)] §3 (Computational methods): finite-size scaling, time-step extrapolation, and population-control bias for the DMC runs on the strained supercells are not detailed; without these, the claimed δ_cr window cannot be distinguished from possible strain-dependent changes in the fixed-node error.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the sentence stating that both VMC and DMC are performed should specify which energies determine the reported δ_cr range and whether error bars on ΔE are included in the supporting figures.
  2. [Figure captions and tables] Figure captions and tables: ensure all energy-difference plots display statistical error bars and list the supercell sizes used for each strain value.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments. We address the two major points below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate the requested clarifications and additional data.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4 (Results) and associated figures] §4 (Results) and associated figures: the reported non-monotonic strain dependence of ΔE = E_RVB − E_JSD is extracted from the variational energies; because the JAGP and JSD ansatzes possess distinct nodal hypersurfaces, it must be shown explicitly that the peak between 15% and 20% strain survives in the fixed-node DMC energies (the abstract states both methods are used, yet the crossover is not confirmed to persist after projection).

    Authors: We agree that explicit confirmation in fixed-node DMC is required to establish that the non-monotonic crossover is robust against differences in nodal hypersurfaces. Our DMC data do show that the peak in ΔE survives in the same 15–20% strain window (with reduced magnitude after projection). We will add a direct comparison of DMC ΔE versus strain (e.g., as an additional panel in the relevant figure or a supplementary plot) to make this explicit. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§3 (Computational methods)] §3 (Computational methods): finite-size scaling, time-step extrapolation, and population-control bias for the DMC runs on the strained supercells are not detailed; without these, the claimed δ_cr window cannot be distinguished from possible strain-dependent changes in the fixed-node error.

    Authors: We acknowledge that these technical details were insufficiently documented. In the revised §3 we will expand the description to include the finite-size scaling procedure, time-step extrapolations, and population-control bias estimates performed for the strained supercells, thereby confirming that the reported δ_cr interval is not an artifact of strain-dependent fixed-node errors. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Direct numerical comparison of independent wave-function ansatzes; no reduction to fit or self-citation

full rationale

The central result is a non-monotonic strain dependence of the variational energy difference between the Jastrow-Slater determinant and the JAGP (RVB) ansatz, obtained from explicit VMC and DMC calculations on a series of stretched lattices. No parameter is fitted to a subset of the data and then re-labeled as a prediction; the crossover at 15-20% strain emerges from the computed energies themselves. No load-bearing step invokes a uniqueness theorem or ansatz from the authors' prior work, and the abstract supplies no self-citation chain that would force the reported behavior. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review prevents exhaustive enumeration. The central claim rests on the variational superiority of the RVB ansatz over the Slater-Jastrow form and on the assumption that diffusion Monte Carlo projects to the true ground state within the chosen nodal surface. No explicit free parameters or invented entities are named in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5767 in / 1324 out tokens · 17778 ms · 2026-06-26T19:09:50.531161+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references

  1. [1]

    Novoselov, A

    K. Novoselov, A. Geim, S. Morozov, D. Jiang, Y. Zhang, S. Dubonos, I. Grigorieva, and A. Firsov, Electric field effect in atomically thin carbon films, Science306, 666 (2004)

    2004

  2. [2]

    Geim and K

    A. Geim and K. Novoselov, The rise of graphene, Nat. Mterials6, 183 (2007)

    2007

  3. [3]

    A. C. Neto, F. Guinea, N. M. Peres, K. Novoselov, and A. K. Geim, The electronic properties of graphene, Rev. Mod. Phys.81, 109 (2009)

    2009

  4. [4]

    Novoselov, A

    K. Novoselov, A. Geim, S. V. Morozov, D. Jiang, M. I. Katsnelson, I. Grigorieva, S. Dubonos, and A. Firsov, Two-dimensional gas of massless dirac fermions in graphene, Nature438, 197 (2005)

    2005

  5. [5]

    V. N. Kotov, B. Uchoa, V. M. Pereira, F. Guinea, and A. H. C. Neto, Electron-electron interactions in graphene: Current status and perspectives, Rev. Mod. Phys.84, 1067 (2012)

    2012

  6. [6]

    S. D. Sarma, S. Adam, E. Hwang, and E. Rossi, Elec- tronic transport in two-dimensional graphene, Rev. Mod. Phys.83, 407 (2011)

    2011

  7. [7]

    Y. Cao, V. Fatemi, S. Fang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, E. Kaxiras, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, Unconventional super- conductivity in magic-angle graphene superlattices, Na- ture566, 43 (2018)

    2018

  8. [8]

    Zheng, Y

    H. Zheng, Y. Gan, P. Abbamonte, and L. K. Wagner, Importance ofσbonding electrons for the accurate de- scription of electron correlation in graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 166402 (2017)

    2017

  9. [9]

    Guinea, M

    F. Guinea, M. Katsnelson, and A. Geim, Energy gaps and a zero-field quantum hall effect in graphene by strain engineering, Nat. Physics6, 30 (2010)

    2010

  10. [10]

    G. J. Verbiest, C. Stampfer, S. E. Huber, M. Andersen, and K. Reuter, Interplay between nanometer-scale strain variations and externally applied strain in graphene, Phys. Rev. B93, 195438 (2016)

    2016

  11. [11]

    Rakshit and P

    B. Rakshit and P. Mahadevan, Absence of rippling in graphene under biaxial tensile strain, Phys. Rev. B 82, 15340782, 153407 (2010)

    2010

  12. [12]

    Changgu, X

    L. Changgu, X. Wei, J. Kysar, and J. Hone, Measure- ment of the elastic properties and intrinsic strength of monolayer graphene, Science321, 385 (2008)

    2008

  13. [13]

    Pereira, A

    V. Pereira, A. C. Neto, and N. Peres, Tight-binding ap- proach to uniaxial strain in graphene, Phys. Rev. B80, 045401 (2009)

    2009

  14. [14]

    A. C. Neto, F. Guinea, N. Peres, K.S.Novoselov, and A. Geim, The electronic properties of graphene, Rev. Mod. Phys.81, 109 (2009)

    2009

  15. [15]

    Uchoa and A

    B. Uchoa and A. H. C. Neto, Superconducting states of pure and doped graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 146801 (2007)

    2007

  16. [16]

    McChesney, A

    J. McChesney, A. Bostwick, T. Ohta, T. Seyller, K. Horn, J. Gonzalez, and E. Rotenberg, Extended van hove singu- larity and superconducting instability in doped graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 136803 (2010)

    2010

  17. [17]

    Pathak and V

    S. Pathak and V. B. G. Baskaran, Possible high- temperature superconducting state with a d+id pairing symmetry in doped graphene, Phys. Rev. B81, 085431 (2010)

    2010

  18. [18]

    Paiva, R

    T. Paiva, R. Scalettar, W. Zheng, R. Singh, and J. Oit- maa, Ground-state and finite-temperature signatures of quantum phase transitions in the half-filled hubbard model on a honeycomb lattice, Phys. Rev. B72, 085123 (2005)

    2005

  19. [19]

    Sorella, Y

    S. Sorella, Y. Otsuka, and S. Yunoki, Absence of a spin liquid phase in the hubbard model on the honeycomb lattice, Sci. Rep.2, 992 (2012)

    2012

  20. [20]

    Assaad and I

    F. Assaad and I. Herbut, Pinning the order: The nature of quantum criticality in the hubbard model on honey- comb lattice, Phys. Rev. X3, 031010 (2013)

    2013

  21. [21]

    Ceperley, G

    D. Ceperley, G. V. Chester, and M. H. Kalos, Monte carlo simulation of a many-fermion study, Phys. Rev. B 16, 3081 (1977)

    1977

  22. [22]

    Ceperley and B

    D. Ceperley and B. Alder, Quantum monte carlo, Science 231, 555 (1986)

    1986

  23. [23]

    W. M. C. Foulkes, L. Mitas, R. J. Needs, and G. Ra- jagopal, Quantum Monte Carlo simulations of solids, Rev. Mod. Phys.73, 33 (2001)

    2001

  24. [24]

    Becca and S

    F. Becca and S. Sorella,Quantum Monte Carlo ap- proches for correlated systems(Cambridge University, Cambridge, UK, 2017)

    2017

  25. [25]

    Drummond, M

    N. Drummond, M. Towler, and R. Needs, Jastrow corre- lation factor for atoms, molecules, and solids, Phys. Rev. B70, 235119 (2004)

    2004

  26. [26]

    Drummond, A

    N. Drummond, A. Williamson, R. Needs, and G. Galli, Electron emission from diamondoids: a diffusion quan- tum monte carlo study, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 096801 (2005)

    2005

  27. [27]

    Kolorenc and L

    J. Kolorenc and L. Mitas, Applications of quantum monte carlo methods in condensed systems, Reports on Progress in Physics74, 026502 (2011)

    2011

  28. [28]

    Foyevtsova, J

    K. Foyevtsova, J. T. Krogel, J. Kim, P. Kent, E. Dagotto, and F. A. Reboredo, Ab initio quantum monte carlo calculations of spin superexchange in cuprates: The benchmarking case of Ca 2CuO3, Phys. Rev. X4, 031003 (2014)

    2014

  29. [29]

    Azadi, N

    S. Azadi, N. Drummond, A. Principi, R. Belosludov, and 5 M. Bahramy, Quantum Monte Carlo study of the quasi- particle effective mass of the two-dimensional uniform electron liquid, Phys. Rev. B112, 075141 (2025)

    2025

  30. [30]

    A. Zen, J. G. Brandenburg, J. Klimes, A. Tkatchenko, D. Alfe, and A. Michaelides, Fast and accurate quantum monte carlo for molecular crystals, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 115, 1724 (2018)

    2018

  31. [31]

    Mazzola, S

    G. Mazzola, S. Yunoki, and S. Sorella, Unexpectedly high pressure for molecular dissociation in liquid hydrogen by electronic simulation, Nat. Comm.5, 3487 (2014)

    2014

  32. [32]

    Sorella, M

    S. Sorella, M. Casula, and D. Rocca, Weak binding be- tween two aromatic rings: Feeling the van der waals attraction by quantum monte carlo methods, J. Chem. Phys.127, 014105 (2007)

    2007

  33. [33]

    Mostaani, N

    E. Mostaani, N. Drummond, and V. FalKo, Quantum monte carlo calculation of the binding energy of bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 115501 (2015)

    2015

  34. [34]

    Mostaani, M

    E. Mostaani, M. Szyniszewski, C. Price, R. Mae- zono, M. Danovich, R. Hunt, N. Drummond, and V. FalKo, Diffusion quantum monte carlo study of ex- citonic complexes in two-dimensional transition-metal dichalcogenides, Phys. Rev. B96, 075431 (2017)

    2017

  35. [35]

    Spanu, S

    L. Spanu, S. Sorella, and G. Galli, Nature and strength of interlayer binding in graphite, Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 2009 (196401)

    2009

  36. [36]

    Azadi, A

    S. Azadi, A. Principi, T. Kuehne, and M. Bahramy, Resonating valence bond pairing energy in graphene by quantum monte carlo, Phys. Rev. B113, L121101 (2026)

    2026

  37. [37]

    Pauling,The Nature of the Chemical Bond(Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, 1960)

    L. Pauling,The Nature of the Chemical Bond(Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, 1960)

    1960

  38. [38]

    P. W. Anderson, The resonating valence bond state in La 2CuO4 and superconductivity, Science235, 1196 (1987)

    1987

  39. [39]

    Capriotti, F

    L. Capriotti, F. Becca, A. Parola, and S. Sorella, Res- onating valence bond wave functions for strongly frus- trated spin systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.87, 097201 (2001)

    2001

  40. [40]

    P. W. Anderson, G. Baskaran, Z. Zou, and T. Hsu, Resonating–valence-bond theory of phase transitions and superconductivity in La 2CuO4-based compounds, Phys. Rev. Lett.58, 2790 (1987)

    1987

  41. [41]

    Baskaran, Electronic model for CoO 2 layer based sys- tems: Chiral resonating valence bond metal and super- conductivity, Phys

    G. Baskaran, Electronic model for CoO 2 layer based sys- tems: Chiral resonating valence bond metal and super- conductivity, Phys. Rev. Lett.91, 097003 (2003)

    2003

  42. [42]

    S. A. Kivelson, I. P. B. E. Fradkin, V. Oganesyan, J. M. Tranquada, A. Kapitulnik, and C. Howald, How to detect fluctuating stripes in the high-temperature superconduc- tors, Rev. Mod. Phys.75, 1201 (2003)

    2003

  43. [43]

    Black-Schaffer and S

    A. Black-Schaffer and S. Doniach, Resonating va- lence bonds and mean-field d-wave superconductivity in graphite, Phys. Rev. B75, 134512 (2007)

    2007

  44. [44]

    Azadi, R

    S. Azadi, R. Singh, and T. D. K¨ uhne, Resonating valence bond Quantum Monte Carlo: Application to the ozone molecule, Int. J. Quantum Chem.115, 1673 (2015)

    2015

  45. [45]

    Nakano, C

    K. Nakano, C. Attaccalite, M. Barborini, L. Capriotti, M. Casula, E. Coccia, M. Dagrada, C. Genovese, Y. Luo, G. Mazzola, A. Zen, and S. Sorella, Turborvb: A many- body toolkit for ab initio electronic simulations by quan- tum Monte Carlo, J. Chem. Phys.152, 204121 (2020)

    2020

  46. [46]

    Marchi, S

    M. Marchi, S. Azadi, M. Casula, and S. Sorella, Resonat- ing valence bond wave function with molecular orbitals: Application to first-row molecules, J. Chem. Phys.131, 154116 (2009)

    2009

  47. [47]

    Marchi, S

    M. Marchi, S. Azadi, and S. Sorella, Fate of the res- onating valence bond in graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 086807 (2011)

    2011

  48. [48]

    Annaberdiyev, G

    A. Annaberdiyev, G. Wang, C. A. Melton, M. C. Ben- nett, L. Shulenburger, and L. Mitas, A new generation of effective core potentials from correlated calculations: 3d transition metal series, J. Chem. Phys.149, 134108 (2018)

    2018

  49. [49]

    M. C. Bennett, C. A. Melton, A. Annaberdiyev, G. Wang, L. Shulenburger, and L. Mitas, A new genera- tion of effective core potentials for correlated calculations, J. Chem. Phys.147, 224106 (2017)

    2017

  50. [50]

    J. P. Perdew and A. Zunger, Self-interaction correction to density-functional approximations for many-electron systems, Phys. Rev. B23, 5048 (1981)

    1981

  51. [51]

    Azadi, C

    S. Azadi, C. Cavazzoni, and S. Sorella, Systematically convergent method for accurate total energy calculations with localized atomic orbitals, Phys. Rev. B82, 125112 (2010)

    2010

  52. [52]

    S. Fahy, X. W. Wang, and S. G. Louie, Variational quan- tum Monte Carlo nonlocal pseudopotential approach to solids: Formulation and application to diamond, graphite, and silicon, Phys. Rev. B42, 3503 (1990)

    1990

  53. [53]

    C. J. Umrigar, J. Toulouse, C. Filippi, S. Sorella, and R. G. Hennig, Alleviation of the fermion-sign problem by optimization of many-body wave functions, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 110201 (2007)

    2007

  54. [54]

    Sorella, Green function Monte Carlo with stochastic reconfiguration, Phys

    S. Sorella, Green function Monte Carlo with stochastic reconfiguration, Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 4558 (1998)

    1998

  55. [55]

    Casula, Beyond the locality approximation in the standard diffusion Monte Carlo method, Phys

    M. Casula, Beyond the locality approximation in the standard diffusion Monte Carlo method, Phys. Rev. B 74, 161102(R) (2006)

    2006

  56. [56]

    Sorella, Wave function optimization in the variational monte carlo method, Phys

    S. Sorella, Wave function optimization in the variational monte carlo method, Phys. Rev. B71, 241103 (2005)

    2005

  57. [57]

    Giannozzi and et al., Quantum Espresso: a modular and open-source software project for quantum simula- tions of materials, J

    P. Giannozzi and et al., Quantum Espresso: a modular and open-source software project for quantum simula- tions of materials, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter39, 395502 (2009)

    2009

  58. [58]

    P. G. et al., Advanced capabilities for materials modelling with Quantum Espresso, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter29, 465901 (2017)

    2017

  59. [59]

    J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Generalized gradient approximation made simple, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865 (1996)

    1996

  60. [60]

    Mitas, Structure of fermion nodes and nodal cells, Phys

    L. Mitas, Structure of fermion nodes and nodal cells, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 240402 (2006)

    2006

  61. [61]

    See Supplemental Material for details of our QMC and DFT calculations, additional figures and data

  62. [62]

    Sorella and E

    S. Sorella and E. Tosatti, Semi-metal-insulator transition of the hubbard model in the honeycomb lattice, Euro- phys. Lett.19, 699 (1992)

    1992

  63. [63]

    Azadi, Github

    S. Azadi, Github. 6 Supplemental Materials I. DFT SIMULA TIONS The DFT calculations were performed using the Quantum ESPRESSO package [57], employing the Perdew–Burke–Ernzerhof (PBE) exchange–correlation functional [59]. A plane-wave kinetic energy cutoff of 100 Ry and a charge density cutoff of 1200 Ry were used. Ul- trasoft pseudopotentials [58] with fo...

    1920