Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 81 references

Auxiliary-field quantum Monte Carlo method with seniority-zero trial wave function

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Doubly occupied configuration interaction wave functions can serve as trial states for phaseless auxiliary-field quantum Monte Carlo, matching CAS-based accuracy for single-bond breaking at lower cost, while failing for strongly…

desk verdict Solid, honest benchmark of DOCI/OO-DOCI trials in ph-AFQMC; the single-bond claims mostly hold, but the polymer-additive 'outperforms CCSD(T)' claim needs an exact reference. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.18937 v2 pith:RQ3KPQXG submitted 2025-01-31 physics.chem-ph cond-mat.str-el

Yuichiro Yoshida , Luca Erhart , Takuma Murokoshi , Rika Nakagawa , Chihiro Mori , Hanae Tagami , Wataru Mizukami This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.chem-phcond-mat.str-el
keywords auxiliary-fieldquantumMonteCarloseniority-zerotrialwavefunctiondoublyoccupiedconfigurationinteractionorbital-optimizedDOCIstaticcorrelationdynamicalbonddissociationpolymeradditives
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper proposes using the doubly occupied configuration interaction (DOCI) wave function—a seniority-zero ansatz that keeps only empty or doubly occupied orbitals—as the trial wave function in phaseless auxiliary-field quantum Monte Carlo (ph-AFQMC). The idea is to let DOCI or its orbital-optimized variant (OO-DOCI) capture static correlation cheaply, and let the QMC imaginary-time propagation add dynamical correlation across all orbitals. The paper shows that for single O–H bond breaking in water and two polymer additives, OO-DOCI-AFQMC closely matches CAS-based ph-AFQMC and even beats CCSD(T), while cutting the trial-state cost from a squared binomial to a single binomial. It also reports that for strongly correlated systems—the carbon dimer, multi-bond breaking in hydrogen systems and water—seniority-zero trials lose quantitative accuracy, so configurations with unpaired electrons are needed in the trial. The net claim is a trade: DOCI trials make ph-AFQMC a cheaper multi-reference method for single-bond and weakly multi-reference problems, with a clearly identified failure mode.

What carries the argument

The central object is the seniority-zero trial wave function: a configuration-interaction wave function built only from electron-pair configurations, in which every spatial orbital is empty or doubly occupied and the number of unpaired electrons (the seniority) is zero. DOCI supplies this trial state, and orbital-optimized OO-DOCI rotates the orbitals to make it as good as possible. Inside ph-AFQMC the trial enters the phaseless weight update $w_i \propto w_i |S_i| \max(0,\cos\Delta\theta_i)$ through the overlap ratio $S_i = \langle\Psi_T|\Phi_i(\tau+\Delta\tau)\rangle/\langle\Psi_T|\Phi_i(\tau)\rangle$, so it controls the sign and phase bias of the random walk. Its practical role is to supply static correlation cheaply, with $N_{DO} = \binom{n}{k}$ configurations instead of $\binom{n}{k}^2$ for a complete active space, while the imaginary-time propagation adds dynamical correlation.

What would settle it

Compute the squared overlap between the OO-DOCI trial and a near-exact (FCI or DMRG) ground state along the H6 ring and C2 dissociation curves: the paper's account predicts this overlap stays high where OO-DOCI-AFQMC matches CASSCF-AFQMC and drops sharply where its energy error grows, so a low overlap in the failing regions would confirm the diagnosis. Alternatively, rerun the failing points with a trial that adds seniority-2 configurations and check whether the energy error disappears.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central claim is that the seniority-zero DOCI wave function is a viable trial state for ph-AFQMC: it supplies enough static correlation to keep the phaseless bias small in mildly multi-reference regimes, and the QMC step supplies the dynamical correlation missing from DOCI itself. The evidence is the set of potential-energy curves: OO-DOCI-AFQMC reproduces CASSCF-AFQMC for single O–H dissociation in water and polymer additives and gives dissociation energies in close agreement with FCI for H2O, while DOCI-AFQMC improves on bare DOCI everywhere. The paper also claims a cost advantage: DOCI's configuration count is binomial in the active space instead of the squared binomial of a complete active space, demonstrated by an OO-DOCI(12e,28o) trial for C2 that CAS cannot reach. The companion claim, made explicitly, is that this strategy is not enough for strongly correlated regimes: errors grow in the fully dissociated H4/H6/H2O curves and in C2, and the paper attributes the failure to the missing seniority-2 (unpaired-electron) configurations in the trial.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the seniority-zero trial wave function has enough overlap with the true ground state to keep the phaseless AFQMC bias small over the entire bond-breaking curve; the paper's own results show this premise breaks down in exactly the most strongly correlated regimes.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For single O–H bond breaking, OO-DOCI-AFQMC reaches CASSCF-AFQMC-level accuracy, so it can serve as a cheaper multi-reference benchmark where CAS trials are too expensive.
  • The trial-state configuration count drops from $\binom{n}{k}^2$ to $\binom{n}{k}$, letting ph-AFQMC use multi-reference trial states in active spaces beyond the usual CAS limit, as demonstrated with the (12e,28o) trial on C2.
  • In strongly correlated regimes—H4/H6 dissociation, two-bond H2O breaking, and C2—seniority-zero trials produce biased ph-AFQMC energies, so quantitative accuracy there requires extending the trial space beyond seniority zero.
  • CCSD(T)'s O–H dissociation curves for hydroquinone and HEMA degrade as the T1 diagnostic exceeds 0.02, while OO-DOCI-AFQMC stays close to the CASSCF-AFQMC reference, reinforcing the need for multi-reference trials in industrially relevant molecules.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: extending the trial space to include seniority-2 configurations (unpaired-electron excitations) should restore quantitative accuracy in C2 and multi-bond dissociation, at a cost still below full CAS; the paper's seniority-zero diagnosis points directly to this as the next test.
  • Editorial inference: because DOCI and pair coupled cluster doubles give nearly identical correlation energies and the latter scales more cheaply, replacing DOCI with a pCCD-style trial inside ph-AFQMC could push the same strategy to much larger active spaces than the paper demonstrates.
  • Editorial inference: the close agreement between OO-DOCI-AFQMC and CASSCF-AFQMC for single O–H bonds suggests that ph-AFQMC's dynamical correlation correction is robust to modest differences in trial-state detail, implying the practical bottleneck is static-correlation content rather than orbital choice.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper proposes using doubly occupied configuration interaction (DOCI) and orbital-optimized DOCI (OO-DOCI) wave functions as trial wave functions in phaseless auxiliary-field quantum Monte Carlo (ph-AFQMC). The motivation is to reduce the exponential cost of complete active space (CAS) trial wave functions while still capturing static correlation, with AFQMC supplying dynamical correlation. The method is tested on linear H4, H6 ring, two-bond water dissociation, the carbon dimer, and single O-H bond breaking in water, hydroquinone (HQ), and 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA). Comparisons are made to CASSCF-AFQMC, CASCI-AFQMC, CCSD, CCSD(T), FCI (for water), and DMRG (for C2). The results show that OO-DOCI-AFQMC closely matches CASSCF-AFQMC and FCI for single O-H bond breaking in water, but deviates significantly in strongly correlated regimes such as the H6 ring dissociation limit, two-bond water dissociation at large r, and the carbon dimer. The authors conclude that seniority-zero trial wave functions are insufficient for strong correlation and suggest extending the seniority space.

Significance. The paper's main positive result, that OO-DOCI-AFQMC reproduces FCI for single O-H bond breaking in water, is a useful demonstration that a seniority-zero trial can work in a regime of moderate static correlation. The honest reporting of failure cases (H6 ring, two-bond water, C2) is a strength and provides clear boundaries for the method's applicability. The use of open-source tools (PySCF, ipie, DOCI module) and detailed computational parameters supports reproducibility. However, the broad promise in the abstract and conclusions, that the method 'offers a path to accurate multi-reference calculations for larger, more complex systems,' is not supported by the data, particularly because the only large-active-space example (C2) shows large errors. The polymer-additive claims also lack an exact reference. The paper is a valid contribution if the claims are recalibrated.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. IV.D, Figs. 9-10] The claim that OO-DOCI-AFQMC 'outperforms coupled-cluster singles, doubles, and perturbative triples' for HQ and HEMA is underdetermined. The only reference for these molecules is CASSCF-AFQMC, which is itself an approximate ph-AFQMC calculation with a different trial; no FCI, DMRG, or other near-exact result is provided. The paper's own data in Figs. 4, 6, and 7 show that seniority-zero trial bias can reach roughly 0.1 Eh in strongly correlated regimes, so agreement with CASSCF-AFQMC does not by itself establish accuracy. To support the claim, the authors should provide an independent reference for HQ/HEMA or weaken the claim to agreement with CASSCF-AFQMC.
  2. [Sec. IV.C, Fig. 7; Sec. V] The only large-active-space calculation, OO-DOCI(12e,28o)-AFQMC for C2 (Fig. 7), shows significant deviations from DMRG, and its energy profile closely mirrors the (8e,8o) result. This directly contradicts the abstract's and conclusion's statement that the method 'offers a path to accurate multi-reference calculations for larger, more complex systems.' The cost reduction is real, but accuracy at larger active spaces is not demonstrated. The conclusions should be restricted to single-bond dissociation with modest active spaces, or rephrased as an open question.
  3. [Sec. IV.C, Fig. 7] The symmetry content of the AFQMC calculations for C2 is unspecified. Fig. 7 compares AFQMC energies to DMRG curves for three states (X 1Σ+g, B 1Δg, B′ 1Σ+g), but the text does not state which symmetry or spin each AFQMC curve corresponds to, nor whether the calculations are restricted to a particular irreducible representation. The discussion of crossings and avoided crossings at r≈3.0 Bohr implies the AFQMC may be following the lowest state irrespective of symmetry, but this is not stated. Without this information, the deviations from DMRG and the discontinuities cannot be interpreted.
  4. [Sec. II.A, Eq. (11); Sec. IV] The central assumption that the seniority-zero trial keeps the phaseless bias small is not quantified. The paper reports no overlap measure (e.g., ⟨ΨT|Ψ0⟩ or local energy variance) for any system, so the reader cannot assess a priori when the method is reliable. Given that the method fails exactly where static correlation is strongest (Figs. 4, 6, 7), a diagnostic based on the DOCI wave function (e.g., weight of the leading configuration or the DOCI–CASSCF energy gap) would strengthen the claim that DOCI captures static correlation in the successful cases.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (11)] The notation Δθ_i for the phase of S_i is inconsistent with the definition θ_i = arg(S_i); please rename to avoid implying a difference from the previous time step.
  2. [Sec. III] The units in 'Δτ = 0.005 E−1 h' should be formatted as E_h^{-1}.
  3. [Sec. IV.D] The geometries of HQ and HEMA are not provided; please include Cartesian coordinates or a reference to allow reproduction.
  4. [Fig. 7] The AFQMC curves are not distinguished by symmetry in the legend; consider using different line styles or clarifying in the caption which state is computed.
  5. [Sec. II.B] The phrase 'reduces the configuration space to the square root' is imprecise; the number of configurations is reduced to the square root of the CAS count, not the space itself.
  6. [Sec. IV.D] 'The molecular geometries used in the Gaussian and PySCF calculations differed only by an amount on the order of round-off error' should be quantified or replaced with a statement that identical geometries were used.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the DOCI trial is generated by independent CI diagonalization and all accuracy claims are checked against external references.

full rationale

The central claim is that seniority-zero DOCI/OO-DOCI trial wave functions, when used in phaseless auxiliary-field quantum Monte Carlo, allow AFQMC to recover dynamical correlation on top of a cheaply captured static correlation. This is not circular by construction. The trial wave function is obtained from an independent variational CI in the seniority-zero subspace (Eq. 13), with its coefficients and, in the OO case, orbitals determined from the electronic Hamiltonian alone; no AFQMC energy enters that construction. The AFQMC energy is computed through imaginary-time propagation (Eqs. 7-11), and the trial enters only through the overlap ratio used for importance sampling and the phaseless constraint. There is no equation in the paper that defines the final AFQMC energy as equal to the DOCI energy or as a function of the DOCI parameters, so the claimed dynamical correlation recovery is a numerical result rather than an identity. Accuracy is judged against FCI, DMRG, CASSCF-AFQMC, CCSD, and CCSD(T), which are external references (though CASSCF-AFQMC is approximate, agreement with it is not enforced by any equation). The paper explicitly reports where the method fails, such as the H6 ring, two-bond H2O dissociation, and the carbon dimer, and attributes these failures to the seniority-zero trial restriction; this is falsifiable evidence rather than an explanation of error away. A few citations are to the authors' own prior work (e.g., refs. 35, 36, 65), but these are not used as uniqueness theorems or as the justification for the seniority-zero ansatz, which is standard DOCI methodology with an independent literature. No load-bearing step reduces to its own inputs, so the paper is self-contained against external benchmarks and no circularity is found.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method introduces no new particles, forces, or fitted constants; AFQMC time step, walker count, and block count are fixed numerical settings rather than data-fitted parameters. The main nonstandard premise is the seniority-zero trial ansatz, which the paper explicitly benchmarks. All other assumptions are standard quantum chemistry and AFQMC machinery.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The phaseless approximation removes the sign problem but introduces a trial-wave-function-dependent bias (Eq. 11).
    The method's accuracy claims depend on the phaseless constraint, which is uncontrolled in principle.
  • standard math Modified Cholesky decomposition of the two-electron integral tensor is numerically accurate (Eq. 3).
    Used to factor the Hamiltonian; standard in AFQMC implementations.
  • ad hoc to paper Seniority-zero configurations dominate the static correlation in the single-bond dissociation cases studied.
    This is the central modeling premise being tested; the paper's data show it fails for strongly correlated systems.
  • domain assumption Orbital optimization in OO-DOCI finds a suitable stationary point for each geometry.
    The OO-DOCI results depend on optimization converging to the intended electronic state; this is not analyzed in detail.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Auxiliary-field quantum Monte Carlo method with seniority-zero trial wave function." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RQ3KPQXG

@misc{pith2026250118937,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Auxiliary-field quantum Monte Carlo method with seniority-zero trial wave function},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RQ3KPQXG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.18937}
}
read the original abstract

We present an approach that uses the doubly occupied configuration interaction (DOCI) wave function as the trial wave function in phaseless auxiliary-field quantum Monte Carlo (ph-AFQMC). DOCI is a seniority-zero method focused on electron pairs. Although DOCI considers much fewer electron configurations than the complete active space (CAS) configuration interaction method, it efficiently captures the static correlation, while the consequent ph-AFQMC recovers the dynamical correlation across all orbitals. We also explore an orbital-optimized version (OO-DOCI) to further improve accuracy. We test this approach on several chemical systems, including single O-H bond breaking in water and polymer additives. In these cases, OO-DOCI-AFQMC closely matches CAS-based ph-AFQMC and even outperforms coupled-cluster singles, doubles, and perturbative triples. However, for strongly correlated systems, such as the carbon dimer and multi-bond dissociation in hydrogen systems and water, the method's accuracy drops. This suggests that seniority-zero space models may be insufficient as trial wave functions in ph-AFQMC for strongly correlated systems, suggesting the need for trial wave functions in an extended space. Despite such a limitation, our study demonstrates that DOCI- and OO-DOCI-based ph-AFQMC can reduce the steep cost of CAS approaches, offering a path to accurate multi-reference calculations for larger, more complex systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.18937 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Example electronic configurations and their corre [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Potential energy curve of the linear H [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Potential energy curve of the hexagonal H [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Potential energy curve of the simultaneous dissocia [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Energy errors relative to CASSCF-AFQMC for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Energy deviations relative to CASSCF-AFQMC for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Structural formulas of (a) hydroquinone (HQ) and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_8.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Potential energy curve of the carbon dimer using the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. O–H bond dissociation energies for (a) HQ, (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_10.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Relative energy curves of (a) HQ, (b) HEMA, and (c) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_9.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: , the fraction of the total correlation energy stemming from (T) also increased with r, reflecting the growing reliance on this perturbative correction. Com￾bined with the increasing T1, these observations under￾line the limitations of an SR approach in CCSD(T) for de…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Spin contamination in UB3LYP for HQ and HEMA, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

81 extracted references · 71 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Burke, Perspective on density functional theory, J

    K. Burke, Perspective on density functional theory, J. Chem. Phys. 136, 150901 (2012)

    2012

  2. [2]

    R. O. Jones, Density functional theory: Its origins, rise to prominence, and future, Rev. Mod. Phys. 87, 897 (2015)

    2015

  3. [3]

    Chanussot, A

    L. Chanussot, A. Das, S. Goyal, T. Lavril, M. Shuaibi, M. Riviere, K. Tran, J. Heras-Domingo, C. Ho, W. Hu, A. Palizhati, A. Sriram, B. Wood, J. Yoon, D. Parikh, C. L. Zitnick, and Z. Ulissi, Open catalyst 2020 (oc20) dataset and community challenges, ACS Catal. 11, 6059 (2021)

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Barroso-Luque, M

    L. Barroso-Luque, M. Shuaibi, X. Fu, B. M. Wood, M. Dzamba, M. Gao, A. Rizvi, C. L. Zitnick, and Z. W. Ulissi, Open materials 2024 (omat24) inorganic materi- als dataset and models (2024), arXiv:2410.12771 [cond- mat.mtrl-sci]

    arXiv 2024

  5. [5]

    Merchant, S

    A. Merchant, S. Batzner, S. S. Schoenholz, M. Aykol, G. Cheon, and E. D. Cubuk, Scaling deep learning for materials discovery, Nature 624, 80 (2023)

    2023

  6. [6]

    J. S. Smith, B. T. Nebgen, R. Zubatyuk, N. Lubbers, C. Devereux, K. Barros, S. Tretiak, O. Isayev, and A. E. Roitberg, Approaching coupled cluster accuracy with a general-purpose neural network potential through trans- fer learning, Nat. Commun. 10, 2903 (2019)

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    D. M. Wilkins, A. Grisafi, Y. Yang, K. U. Lao, R. A. DiS- tasio, and M. Ceriotti, Accurate molecular polarizabili- ties with coupled cluster theory and machine learning, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116, 3401 (2019)

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    D. I. Lyakh, M. Musia l, V. F. Lotrich, and R. J. Bartlett, Multireference nature of chemistry: The coupled-cluster view, Chem. Rev. 112, 182 (2012)

    work page 2012

Show all 81 references
  1. [9]

    Riplinger and F

    C. Riplinger and F. Neese, An efficient and near linear scaling pair natural orbital based local coupled cluster method, J. Chem. Phys. 138, 034106 (2013)

    2013

  2. [10]

    Riplinger, B

    C. Riplinger, B. Sandhoefer, A. Hansen, and F. Neese, Natural triple excitations in local coupled cluster calcu- lations with pair natural orbitals, J. Chem. Phys. 139, 134101 (2013)

    2013

  3. [11]

    Riplinger, P

    C. Riplinger, P. Pinski, U. Becker, E. F. Valeev, and F. Neese, Sparse maps—A systematic infrastructure for reduced-scaling electronic structure methods. II. Linear scaling domain based pair natural orbital coupled cluster theory, J. Chem. Phys. 144, 024109 (2016)

    2016

  4. [12]

    Saitow, U

    M. Saitow, U. Becker, C. Riplinger, E. F. Valeev, and F. Neese, A new near-linear scaling, efficient and ac- curate, open-shell domain-based local pair natural or- bital coupled cluster singles and doubles theory, J. Chem. Phys. 146, 164105 (2017)

    2017

  5. [13]

    Y. Guo, C. Riplinger, U. Becker, D. G. Liakos, Y. Mi- nenkov, L. Cavallo, and F. Neese, Communication: An improved linear scaling perturbative triples correction for the domain based local pair-natural orbital based singles and doubles coupled cluster method [DLPNO-CCSD(T)], J...

    2018

  6. [14]

    D. G. Liakos, Y. Guo, and F. Neese, Comprehen- sive Benchmark Results for the Domain Based Local Pair Natural Orbital Coupled Cluster Method (DLPNO- CCSD(T)) for Closed- and Open-Shell Systems, J. Phys. Chem. A 124, 90 (2020)

    2020

  7. [15]

    Y. Guo, C. Riplinger, D. G. Liakos, U. Becker, M. Saitow, and F. Neese, Linear scaling perturbative triples cor- rection approximations for open-shell domain-based lo- cal pair natural orbital coupled cluster singles and dou- bles theory [DLPNO-CCSD(T/T)], J. Chem. Phys. 152, ...

    2020

  8. [16]

    Andersson, P

    K. Andersson, P. Malmqvist, and B. O. Roos, Second- order perturbation theory with a complete active space self-consistent field reference function, J. Chem. Phys. 96, 1218 (1992)

    1992

  9. [17]

    Zhang and H

    S. Zhang and H. Krakauer, Quantum Monte Carlo Method using Phase-Free Random Walks with Slater De- terminants, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 136401 (2003)

    2003

  10. [18]

    J. Lee, H. Q. Pham, and D. R. Reichman, Twenty years of auxiliary-field quantum monte carlo in quantum chem- istry: An overview and assessment on main group chem- istry and bond-breaking, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 18, 7024 (2022)

    2022

  11. [19]

    Taheridehkordi, M

    A. Taheridehkordi, M. Schlipf, Z. Sukurma, M. Humer, A. Gr¨ uneis, and G. Kresse, Phaseless auxiliary field quantum Monte Carlo with projector-augmented wave method for solids, J. Chem. Phys. 159, 044109 (2023)

    2023

  12. [20]

    J. Lee, F. D. Malone, and M. A. Morales, An auxiliary- Field quantum Monte Carlo perspective on the ground state of the dense uniform electron gas: An investigation with Hartree-Fock trial wavefunctions, J. Chem. Phys. 151, 064122 (2019)

    2019

  13. [21]

    Neugebauer, H

    H. Neugebauer, H. T. Vuong, J. L. Weber, R. A. Fries- ner, J. Shee, and A. Hansen, Toward Benchmark-Quality Ab Initio Predictions for 3d Transition Metal Electrocat- alysts: A Comparison of CCSD(T) and ph-AFQMC, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 19, 6208 (2023)

    2023

  14. [22]

    Sukurma, M

    Z. Sukurma, M. Schlipf, M. Humer, A. Taheridehko- rdi, and G. Kresse, Benchmark Phaseless Auxiliary-Field Quantum Monte Carlo Method for Small Molecules, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 19, 4921 (2023)

    2023

  15. [23]

    Y. Wei, S. Debnath, J. L. Weber, A. Mahajan, D. R. Reichman, and R. A. Friesner, Scalable Ab Initio Elec- tronic Structure Methods with Near Chemical Accuracy for Main Group Chemistry, J. Phys. Chem. A 128, 5796 (2024)

    2024

  16. [24]

    Huang, Z

    Y. Huang, Z. Guo, H. Q. Pham, and D. Lv, GPU- accelerated Auxiliary-field quantum Monte Carlo with 10 multi-Slater determinant trial states, arXiv e-prints 10.48550/arXiv.2406.08314 (2024), arXiv:2406.08314 [physics.chem-ph]

    2024 doi arXiv

  17. [25]

    Jiang, M

    T. Jiang, M. K. A. Baumgarten, P.-F. Loos, A. Mahajan, A. Scemama, S. F. Ung, J. Zhang, F. D. Malone, and J. Lee, Improved modularity and new features in ipie: Toward even larger AFQMC calculations on CPUs and GPUs at zero and finite temperatures, J. Chem. Phys. 161, 162502 (2024)

    2024

  18. [26]

    Mahajan and S

    A. Mahajan and S. Sharma, Taming the sign problem in auxiliary-field quantum monte carlo using accurate wave functions, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 17, 4786 (2021)

    2021

  19. [27]

    F. D. Malone, A. Mahajan, J. S. Spencer, and J. Lee, ipie: A Python-Based Auxiliary-Field Quantum Monte Carlo Program with Flexibility and Efficiency on CPUs and GPUs, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 19, 109 (2023)

    2023

  20. [28]

    Mahajan, J

    A. Mahajan, J. Lee, and S. Sharma, Selected configu- ration interaction wave functions in phaseless auxiliary field quantum Monte Carlo, J. Chem. Phys. 156, 174111 (2022)

    2022

  21. [29]

    Mahajan, J

    A. Mahajan, J. H. Thorpe, J. S. Kurian, D. R. Reich- man, D. A. Matthews, and S. Sharma, Beyond CCSD(T) accuracy at lower scaling with auxiliary field quantum Monte Carlo, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2410.02885 (2024), arXiv:2410.02885 [physics.chem-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Jiang, B

    T. Jiang, B. O’Gorman, A. Mahajan, and J. Lee, Unbias- ing fermionic auxiliary-field quantum Monte Carlo with matrix product state trial wavefunctions, Phys. Rev. Res. 7, 013038 (2025)

    2025

  23. [31]

    Chang and Z.-X

    W.-X. Chang and Z.-X. Li, Boosting quantum monte carlo and alleviating sign problem by gutzwiller projec- tion, Phys. Rev. B 110, 085152 (2024)

    2024

  24. [32]

    W. J. Huggins, B. A. O’Gorman, N. C. Rubin, D. R. Reichman, R. Babbush, and J. Lee, Unbiasing fermionic quantum monte carlo with a quantum computer, Nature 603, 416 (2022)

    2022

  25. [33]

    Huang, Y.-T

    B. Huang, Y.-T. Chen, B. Gupt, M. Suchara, A. Tran, S. McArdle, and G. Galli, Evaluating a quantum-classical quantum Monte Carlo algorithm with Matchgate shad- ows, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 043063 (2024)

    2024

  26. [34]

    Sukurma, M

    Z. Sukurma, M. Schlipf, and G. Kresse, Self- Refinement of Auxiliary-Field Quantum Monte Carlo via Non-Orthogonal Configuration Interaction, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2501.12765 (2025), arXiv:2501.12765 [physics.chem-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Khinevich and W

    V. Khinevich and W. Mizukami, Enhancing quantum computations with the synergy of auxiliary field quantum Monte Carlo and computational basis tomography, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2502.20066 (2025), arXiv:2502.20066 [quant-ph]

    2025

  28. [36]

    Yoshida, L

    Y. Yoshida, L. Erhart, T. Murokoshi, R. Nakagawa, C. Mori, T. Miyanaga, T. Mori, and W. Mizukami, Auxiliary-field quantum Monte Carlo method with quan- tum selected configuration interaction, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2502.21081 (2025), arXiv:2502.21081 [quant-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Danilov, J

    D. Danilov, J. Robledo-Moreno, K. J. Sung, M. Motta, and J. Shee, Enhancing the accuracy and efficiency of sample-based quantum diagonalization with phaseless auxiliary-field quantum Monte Carlo, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2503.05967 (2025), arXiv:2503.05967 [quant-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  30. [38]

    T. L. Allen and H. Shull, ELECTRON PAIRS IN THE BERYLLIUM ATOM, J. Phys. Chem. 66, 2281 (1962)

    1962

  31. [39]

    D. W. Smith and S. J. Fogel, Natural Orbitals and Gem- inals of the Beryllium Atom, J. Chem. Phys. 43, S91 (1965)

    1965

  32. [40]

    Weinhold and E

    F. Weinhold and E. B. Wilson, Reduced Density Matri- ces of Atoms and Molecules. I. The 2 Matrix of Double- Occupancy, Configuration-Interaction Wavefunctions for Singlet States, J. Chem. Phys. 46, 2752 (1967)

    1967

  33. [41]

    Veillard and E

    A. Veillard and E. Clementi, Complete multi- configuration self-consistent field theory, Theoret. Chim. Acta 7, 133 (1967)

    1967

  34. [42]

    Cook, Doubly-occupied orbital MCSCF methods, Mol

    D. Cook, Doubly-occupied orbital MCSCF methods, Mol. Phys. 30, 733 (1975)

    1975

  35. [43]

    Fantucci and S

    P. Fantucci and S. Polezzo, Direct minimization of the energy functional in the LCAO-MO density matrix for- malism, Theoret. Chim. Acta 45, 317 (1977)

    1977

  36. [44]

    Couty and M

    M. Couty and M. B. Hall, Generalized Molecular Orbital Theory II, J. Phys. Chem. A 101, 6936 (1997)

    1997

  37. [45]

    Kollmar and B

    C. Kollmar and B. A. Heß, A new approach to den- sity matrix functional theory, J. Chem. Phys. 119, 4655 (2003)

    2003

  38. [46]

    Bytautas, T

    L. Bytautas, T. M. Henderson, C. A. Jim´ enez-Hoyos, J. K. Ellis, and G. E. Scuseria, Seniority and orbital sym- metry as tools for establishing a full configuration inter- action hierarchy, J. Chem. Phys. 135, 044119 (2011)

    2011

  39. [47]

    P. A. Limacher, P. W. Ayers, P. A. Johnson, S. De Baerdemacker, D. Van Neck, and P. Bultinck, A New Mean-Field Method Suitable for Strongly Corre- lated Electrons: Computationally Facile Antisymmetric Products of Nonorthogonal Geminals, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 9, 1394 (2013)

    2013

  40. [48]

    Van Raemdonck, D

    M. Van Raemdonck, D. R. Alcoba, W. Poelmans, S. De Baerdemacker, A. Torre, L. Lain, G. E. Massaccesi, D. Van Neck, and P. Bultinck, Polynomial scaling ap- proximations and dynamic correlation corrections to dou- bly occupied configuration interaction wave functions, J. Chem. P...

    2015

  41. [49]

    Lucarini and G

    M. Lucarini and G. F. Pedulli, Free radical intermediates in the inhibition of the autoxidation reaction, Chem. Soc. Rev. 39, 2106 (2010)

    2010

  42. [50]

    N. H. F. Beebe and J. Linderberg, Simplifications in the generation and transformation of two-electron integrals in molecular calculations, Int. J. Quant. Chem. 12, 683 (1977)

    1977

  43. [51]

    Aquilante, L

    F. Aquilante, L. De Vico, N. Ferr´ e, G. Ghigo, P.- ˚ a. Malmqvist, P. Neogr´ ady, T. B. Pedersen, M. Pitoˇ n´ ak, M. Reiher, B. O. Roos, L. Serrano-Andr´ es, M. Urban, V. Veryazov, and R. Lindh, MOLCAS 7: The Next Gen- eration, J. Comput. Chem. 31, 224 (2010)

    2010

  44. [52]

    Motta and S

    M. Motta and S. Zhang, Ab initio computations of molec- ular systems by the auxiliary-field quantum Monte Carlo method, WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci. 8, e1364 (2018)

    2018

  45. [53]

    Stein, T

    T. Stein, T. M. Henderson, and G. E. Scuseria, Seniority zero pair coupled cluster doubles theory, J. Chem. Phys. 140, 214113 (2014)

    2014

  46. [54]

    T. M. Henderson, I. W. Bulik, T. Stein, and G. E. Scuse- ria, Seniority-based coupled cluster theory, J. Chem. Phys. 141, 244104 (2014)

    2014

  47. [55]

    T. M. Henderson, I. W. Bulik, and G. E. Scuseria, Pair extended coupled cluster doubles, J. Chem. Phys. 142, 214116 (2015)

    2015

  48. [56]

    T. M. Henderson and G. E. Scuseria, Geminal-based configuration interaction, J. Chem. Phys. 151, 051101 (2019)

    2019

  49. [57]

    Senjean, S

    B. Senjean, S. Yalouz, N. Nakatani, and E. Fromager, Re- duced density matrix functional theory from an ab initio seniority-zero wave function: Exact and approximate for- 11 mulations along adiabatic connection paths, Phys. Rev. A 106, 032203 (2022)

    2022

  50. [58]

    Q. Sun, X. Zhang, S. Banerjee, P. Bao, M. Barbry, N. S. Blunt, N. A. Bogdanov, G. H. Booth, J. Chen, Z.-H. Cui, J. J. Eriksen, Y. Gao, S. Guo, J. Hermann, M. R. Hermes, K. Koh, P. Koval, S. Lehtola, Z. Li, J. Liu, N. Mardirossian, J. D. McClain, M. Motta, B. Mussard, H. Q. Pha...

    2020

  51. [59]

    Q. Sun, T. C. Berkelbach, N. S. Blunt, G. H. Booth, S. Guo, Z. Li, J. Liu, J. D. McClain, E. R. Sayfut- yarova, S. Sharma, S. Wouters, and G. K.-L. Chan, Pyscf: the python-based simulations of chemistry framework, WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci. 8, e1340 (2018)

    2018

  52. [60]

    Sun, DOCI module for PySCF (2021)

    Q. Sun, DOCI module for PySCF (2021)

    2021

  53. [61]

    M. J. Frisch, G. W. Trucks, H. B. Schlegel, G. E. Scuseria, M. A. Robb, J. R. Cheeseman, G. Scal- mani, V. Barone, G. A. Petersson, H. Nakatsuji, X. Li, M. Caricato, A. V. Marenich, J. Bloino, B. G. Janesko, R. Gomperts, B. Mennucci, H. P. Hratchian, J. V. Or- tiz, A. F. Izmay...

    2016

  54. [62]

    A. V. Sinitskiy, L. Greenman, and D. A. Mazziotti, Strong correlation in hydrogen chains and lattices us- ing the variational two-electron reduced density matrix method, J. Chem. Phys. 133, 014104 (2010)

    2010

  55. [63]

    Kats and F

    D. Kats and F. R. Manby, Communication: The distin- guishable cluster approximation, J. Chem. Phys. 139, 021102 (2013)

    2013

  56. [64]

    Kinoshita, O

    T. Kinoshita, O. Hino, and R. J. Bartlett, Coupled- cluster method tailored by configuration interaction, J. Chem. Phys. 123, 074106 (2005)

    2005

  57. [65]

    Erhart, Y

    L. Erhart, Y. Yoshida, V. Khinevich, and W. Mizukami, Coupled cluster method tailored with quantum comput- ing, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 023230 (2024)

    2024

  58. [66]

    R. D. J. III, Nist computational chemistry compar- ison and benchmark database, http://cccbdb.nist. gov/ (2022), nIST Standard Reference Database Num- ber 101, Release 22, May 2022

    2022

  59. [67]

    Wouters, W

    S. Wouters, W. Poelmans, P. W. Ayers, and D. Van Neck, CheMPS2: A free open-source spin-adapted implementa- tion of the density matrix renormalization group for ab initio quantum chemistry, Comput. Phys. Commun.185, 1501 (2014)

    2014

  60. [68]

    Leszczyk, M

    A. Leszczyk, M. M´ at´ e,¨O. Legeza, and K. Boguslawski, Assessing the accuracy of tailored coupled cluster meth- ods corrected by electronic wave functions of polynomial cost, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 18, 96 (2022)

    2022

  61. [69]

    Bond Energies (2023), [Online; accessed 2024-11-03]

    2023

  62. [70]

    T. J. Lee and P. R. Taylor, A diagnostic for determining the quality of single-reference electron correlation meth- ods, Int. J. Quantum Chem. 36, 199 (1989)

    1989

  63. [71]

    Boguslawski, P

    K. Boguslawski, P. Tecmer, P. W. Ayers, P. Bultinck, S. De Baerdemacker, and D. Van Neck, Efficient descrip- tion of strongly correlated electrons with mean-field cost, Phys. Rev. B 89, 201106 (2014)

    2014

  64. [72]

    Tecmer and K

    P. Tecmer and K. Boguslawski, Geminal-based electronic structure methods in quantum chemistry. toward a gemi- nal model chemistry, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.24, 23026 (2022)

    2022

  65. [73]

    Kawasaki and N

    A. Kawasaki and N. Nakatani, Low-rank decomposition on the antisymmetric product of geminals for strongly correlated electrons, Mol. Phys. 0, e2449186 (2025)

    2025

  66. [74]

    J. J. Shepherd, T. M. Henderson, and G. E. Scuseria, Us- ing full configuration interaction quantum Monte Carlo in a seniority zero space to investigate the correlation en- ergy equivalence of pair coupled cluster doubles and dou- bly occupied configuration interaction, J. Che...

    2016

  67. [75]

    Kobayashi, ´A

    M. Kobayashi, ´A. Szabados, H. Nakai, and P. R. Surj´ an, Generalized Møller-Plesset Partitioning in Multiconfigu- ration Perturbation Theory, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 6, 2024 (2010)

    2010

  68. [76]

    P. A. Limacher, P. W. Ayers, P. A. Johnson, S. De Baerdemacker, D. V. Neck, and P. Bultinck, Simple and inexpensive perturbative correction schemes for an- tisymmetric products of nonorthogonal geminals, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 16, 5061 (2014)

    2014

  69. [77]

    Boguslawski and P

    K. Boguslawski and P. W. Ayers, Linearized Coupled Cluster Correction on the Antisymmetric Product of 1- Reference Orbital Geminals, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 11, 5252 (2015)

    2015

  70. [78]

    Boguslawski and P

    K. Boguslawski and P. Tecmer, Benchmark of Dynamic Electron Correlation Models for Seniority-Zero Wave Functions and Their Application to Thermochemistry, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 13, 5966 (2017)

    2017

  71. [79]

    A. J. Garza, I. W. Bulik, T. M. Henderson, and G. E. Scuseria, Synergy between pair coupled cluster doubles and pair density functional theory, J. Chem. Phys. 142, 044109 (2015)

    2015

  72. [80]

    A. J. Garza, I. W. Bulik, T. M. Henderson, and G. E. Scuseria, Range separated hybrids of pair coupled clus- ter doubles and density functionals, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 17, 22412 (2015)

    2015

  73. [81]

    A. J. Garza, A. G. Sousa Alencar, and G. E. Scuseria, Actinide chemistry using singlet-paired coupled cluster and its combinations with density functionals, J. Chem. Phys. 143, 244106 (2015)

    2015

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.