Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 58 references

Enhancing the Computational Efficiency of the DoNOF Program through a New Orbital Sorting Scheme

T0 review · 4 major / 4 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 An alternating orbital sorting scheme turns the subspace assignment into a free computational degree of freedom, and a two-step warm start (perfect pairing, then the full subspace) is the cheapest of three strategies while keeping accuracy.

desk verdict A simple, clearly explained orbital-sorting trick that genuinely speeds up DoNOF warm starts; the validation is narrow, and the claimed sorting invariance deserves one cheap test. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.01786 v1 pith:G7JT6WFK submitted 2025-02-03 physics.chem-ph physics.comp-ph

Élodie Boutou , Juan Felipe Huan Lew-Yee , Jose Maria Mercero , Mario Piris This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.chem-phphysics.comp-ph
keywords naturalorbitalfunctionaltheoryelectronpairingsortingsubspaceoptimizationperfectextendedGNOFDoNOF
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

This paper claims that a simple change in how orbitals are sorted into electron-pairing subspaces unlocks a cheaper way to run natural orbital functional calculations. The new alternating order assigns weakly occupied orbitals to subspaces in a staggered pattern, so enlarging each subspace no longer shuffles previously paired orbitals. That makes it possible to solve a small perfect-pairing problem first and reuse its converged orbitals as the starting point for the full extended-pairing problem. Benchmarking three strategies on water, hydrogen peroxide, and ammonia, the paper finds that the two-step approach, perfect pairing followed by a direct jump to the maximum subspace size, has the lowest total computational cost while preserving accuracy. The underlying physical claim is that the converged energy does not depend on which weakly occupied orbitals are grouped into which subspace, so the sorting order can be used purely as a computational lever.

What carries the argument

The central object is the orbital subspace $\Omega_g = \{ |g\rangle, |p_1\rangle, \dots, |p_{N_g}\rangle \}$, with the pairing constraint that the total occupancy of each spin channel is 1. The mechanism is the alternating assignment: weakly occupied orbitals are distributed across subspaces in a round-robin fashion instead of taking contiguous blocks. This makes the subspaces for different $N_g$ nested rather than disjoint, so increasing $N_g$ only adds a new layer of orbitals to every subspace and leaves the converged orbitals from the previous run usable as an initial guess. The GNOF energy functional and its optimization, via softmax occupation parametrization and momentum-based orbital updates, supply the equations; the sorting scheme is what carries the efficiency argument.

What would settle it

Run the two-step protocol on a molecule with a randomized assignment of weakly occupied orbitals to subspaces, using several different alternating orderings, and compare the final converged GNOF energies and wall times; if the converged energies differ by more than numerical noise, or if some ordering makes the two-step run slower than the one-shot run, the central claims of order-invariance and of two-step efficiency would be contradicted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that the order in which weakly occupied orbitals are assigned to electron-pairing subspaces is a free computational degree of freedom. A contiguous assignment, in which the orbitals of each subspace form a block, forces every pairing calculation to be solved from scratch when the subspace size changes. An alternating assignment, in which the first weakly occupied orbital goes to the last subspace, the second to the previous one, and so on, makes the subspaces nested: going from $N_g$ to $N_g+1$ simply appends one orbital to every subspace without disturbing the existing pairing. With this ordering the DoNOF program can converge a perfect-pairing solution ($N_g=1$), then restart directly at the maximum subspace size $N_g^{\max}$ allowed by the basis set. On H$_2$O, H$_2$O$_2$, and NH$_3$ with GNOF and the cc-pVTZ basis set, this two-step strategy reaches the same energy as the one-shot calculation in the shortest total time of the three strategies compared.

Load-bearing premise

The energy is assumed not to depend on which weakly occupied orbitals are grouped into which subspace, only on the set of orbitals available; if that grouping changes the physics for some systems, the warm-started answers could differ from the one-shot answer and the speedup could come with an accuracy cost.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For molecules where perfect pairing is a reasonable zeroth-order description, the two-step protocol should be preferred over one-shot calculations because it reaches the same GNOF energy in less wall time.
  • The incremental strategy, with its monotonic energy descent, provides numerical stability when intermediate subspace sizes are needed for analysis or for diagnosing convergence.
  • The nesting property makes warm-started subspace growth practical: a converged solution at small $N_g$ can be recycled instead of discarded when the subspace is expanded.
  • The efficiency gain is expected to become more pronounced for larger systems and larger basis sets, since the one-shot iterations at $N_g^{\max}$ are the most expensive ones.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same round-robin nesting idea could speed up other subspace-based electronic-structure methods, such as active-space or embedding schemes, that currently rebuild their orbital subspaces from scratch when the subspace size changes; the paper does not test this.
  • A direct stress test would be a molecule with strong static correlation, such as a stretched bond, where the perfect-pairing starting point is less representative; if the two-step warm start then offers no time saving, the method's domain is narrower than the benchmark set suggests.
  • Because the claimed invariance of the energy under orbital reordering is only checked implicitly through three closed-shell molecules, randomizing the alternating assignment for a single molecule and comparing converged energies and iteration counts would quantify how robust the free degree of freedom really is.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes an alternating orbital sorting scheme for distributing weakly occupied orbitals among electron-pairing subspaces in the DoNOF implementation of the GNOF functional. The authors argue that, unlike the previous contiguous sorting, the alternating scheme allows converged solutions from small subspace sizes (perfect pairing, Ng=1) to be reused as starting points for larger subspace sizes (extended pairing). They compare three strategies—one-shot, incremental, and two-step—on H2O, H2O2, and NH3 with cc-pVTZ basis sets and report that the two-step strategy reaches the same final energy in the shortest wall-clock time.

Significance. If the reported efficiency gain is robust, the alternating sorting scheme is a practically useful improvement for NOF calculations, because it enables warm-start strategies that reuse converged orbital information across subspace sizes. The paper does not introduce fitted parameters and builds on previously published GNOF, ADAM, and softmax parametrization, so the efficiency claim is empirical and not circular. The central idea is sensible and could matter for larger strongly correlated systems. However, the quantitative support is thin: the benchmarks are single-run wall-clock curves for three small closed-shell molecules, with no convergence thresholds, timing statistics, or tests of the underlying invariance assumption.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3, Figures 4 and 5] The central claim that the two-step strategy achieves the lowest computational cost rests entirely on wall-clock time curves from single runs. The manuscript reports no numerical timing values, no iteration counts, no convergence thresholds, no statistics over repeated runs, and no optimizer hyperparameters. Since the efficiency gain is the paper's main result, the authors should provide quantitative tables (total time, number of external iterations, final energies for each strategy), specify the convergence criteria for the occupation numbers and natural orbitals, and report hardware/software versions. Without this, the ranking of the three strategies is not reproducible.
  2. [Section 2, paragraph beginning 'It is important to recall...'] The statement that 'the order in which the weakly occupied orbitals are selected to form the subspaces Ω_g does not affect the physical nature of the problem' is asserted without proof. For a fixed set of orbitals, the GNOF energy in Eqs. (A2)-(A6) depends on which weak orbitals are assigned to each Ω_g through the intrapair sum over p,q ∈ Ω_g and through the inter-subspace sums. The Ω_b exclusion in Eqs. (A5)-(A6) does not remove this dependence, because Ω_b is the set of strongly occupied orbitals and is unaffected by the weak-orbital ordering. The claim should be either proved or explicitly reframed as a statement about the optimizer's ability to re-adapt the partition. A concrete test would be to take a converged solution, permute the assignment of weakly occupied orbitals among the subspaces, and verify that re-optimization recovers the same energy; the paper currently provides no such test.
  3. [Section 3 and Conclusion] The conclusions claim a 'robust and scalable framework' and an 'optimal computational strategy' based on three small closed-shell molecules. The two-step strategy assumes that the perfect-pairing solution is a useful approximation to the extended-pairing problem. This is plausible for the tested systems, but it is not guaranteed for strongly correlated or open-shell systems where the Ng=1 solution may be far from the extended-pairing solution. The authors should either add a test case where this assumption is stressed or explicitly limit the conclusions to the tested regime.
  4. [Section 3, paragraph introducing Figure 4] The text states that 'the one-shot calculation is independent of the orbital sorting scheme used to form the subspaces.' This is true only in the sense that the final converged energy should be invariant; the convergence path and thus the wall-clock time can still depend on the initial subspace assignment determined by the sorting order. Since the one-shot calculation is the baseline against which the warm-start strategies are measured, the authors should clarify whether the one-shot runs used continuous or alternating sorting and whether the initial subspace assignment was identical across all strategies.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Figure 1 and Figure 5 captions] There are typographical errors: 'Continious' in Figure 1 and 'bassis' in Figure 5 should be 'Continuous' and 'basis', respectively; '0na' in Section 3 should be 'on an'.
  2. [Reference [52]] Reference [52] is incomplete: the title of the DoNOF paper is cut off after 'natural-orbital-functional-based'.
  3. [Equation (6)] In Eq. (6), the summation 'p∈Ω_g' includes the strongly occupied orbital g as well as the weak orbitals, which may confuse readers; a more explicit notation, such as 'p ∈ {g, p1, ..., pNg}', would be clearer.
  4. [Appendix] The Appendix begins with 'Consider a mixed singlet state,' while the main text describes the restricted-spin formalism for the highest-multiplicity case; the relationship between these state descriptions should be clarified.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the efficiency claim is an empirical benchmark of a new orbital sorting scheme built on independently defined GNOF, ADAM, and DoNOF components.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that an alternating orbital sorting strategy enables warm-started GNOF calculations that converge faster than one-shot calculations. This claim is supported by direct runtime and iteration benchmarks on H2O, H2O2, and NH3, not by a derivation that assumes the conclusion. No parameter is fitted and then renamed as a prediction: the energy curves and timings are measured outcomes of the DoNOF implementation. GNOF is defined self-contained in the Appendix, while the ADAM optimizer and softmax parametrization are cited from prior work; these citations are usage of established tools, not load-bearing circular arguments, because the improvement attributed to the sorting scheme is measured relative to runs using the same functional and optimizer. The statement that the order of weakly occupied orbitals 'does not affect the physical nature of the problem' is an assumption underlying the warm-start strategy, and the paper does not prove the invariance of GNOF under subspace reassignment. However, that is a correctness or robustness concern, not circularity: the efficiency results could be invalidated by a sorting-dependent functional, but they are not equivalent to the input by construction. A fixed-orbital permutation test would strengthen the paper, but its absence does not make the derivation circular. Accordingly, the paper is best scored 0 for circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities or fitted parameters are introduced. The work relies on the existing GNOF functional, on the ADAM optimizer behavior, and on the invariance of the energy under orbital reordering. The only parameter varied, Ng, is a subspace size chosen manually for each calculation.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption GNOF, as defined in Ref. [39], is the energy functional used; its accuracy is taken as given.
    The paper does not re-derive GNOF; the efficiency comparison presupposes this functional produces meaningful energies. The claim of 'maintaining high accuracy' depends on GNOF's established behavior.
  • domain assumption The orbital optimization using the ADAM-inspired optimizer converges to the appropriate minimum when restarted from a warm start.
    The entire speedup argument assumes warm starts reduce the number of iterations to the same converged solution; this is an empirical property of the optimizer, not proven from theory.
  • domain assumption The energy is invariant under the permutation used in alternating sorting; any labeling of weakly occupied orbitals within subspaces gives the same physical state.
    Stated in Section 2 around Figure 1: 'the order in which the weakly occupied orbitals are selected to form the subspaces does not affect the physical nature of the problem.' This is true for the exact functional but the optimizer's behavior may still depend on labeling.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Enhancing the Computational Efficiency of the DoNOF Program through a New Orbital Sorting Scheme." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/G7JT6WFK

@misc{pith2026250201786,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Enhancing the Computational Efficiency of the DoNOF Program through a New Orbital Sorting Scheme},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/G7JT6WFK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.01786}
}
read the original abstract

This work presents a novel approach to distribute orbitals into subspaces within electron-pairing-based natural orbital functionals (NOFs). This approach modifies the coupling between weakly and strongly occupied orbitals by applying an alternating orbital sorting strategy. In contrast to the previous orbital sorting that enforced electron pairing within subspaces of contiguous orbitals, the new approach provides greater flexibility, enabling a calculation scheme where the size of the subspaces can be gradually expanded. As a consequence, one can start using subspaces of only one weakly occupied orbital (perfect pairing) and progressively enlarge their size by incorporating more weakly occupied orbitals (extended pairing) up to the maximum size allowed by the basis set. In this way, the alternate orbital sorting allows solving first a simpler problem with small subspaces and leverage its orbital solution for the more intensive problem with larger subspaces, thereby reducing the overall computational cost and improving convergence, as we observed in the DoNOF program. The efficiency provided by the new sorting approach has been validated through benchmark calculations in H2O, H2O2, and NH3. In particular, we compared three strategies: i) solving directly the calculation with the largest subspaces (one-shot strategy), as was usually done before this work, ii) starting with perfect pairing and stepwise increasing the number of orbitals in the subspaces one by one until reaching the maximum size (incremental strategy), and iii) starting with perfect pairing and transitioning directly to the maximum subspace size (two-step strategy). Our results show that the two-step approach emerges as the most effective strategy, achieving the lowest computational cost while maintaining high accuracy.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.01786 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Graphical depiction of continuous orbital sortin [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. H2O calculated using GNOF/cc-pVTZ as a function of the subspace. The one￾shot scheme was employed, that is, each point has been computed independently. Top panel shows the time per orbital iteration, while bottom panel shows the energy for each subspace size. 10 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Energy variations in the water molecule during the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Energy profile along the calculation of H [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Profile of the energy along the calculation time for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    T. L. Gilbert, Hohenberg-kohn theorem for nonlocal exte rnal potentials, Phys. Rev. 12 (6) (1975) 2111–2120. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.12.2111

    doi:10.1103/physrevb.12.2111 1975

  2. [2]

    R. A. Donnelly, R. G. Parr, Elementary properties of an en ergy func- tional of the first-order reduced density matrix, J. Chem. Ph ys. 69 (1978) 4431–4439. doi:10.1063/1.436433

    work page doi:10.1063/1.436433 1978

  3. [3]

    R. A. Donnelly, On fundamental difference between energy functionals based on first- and second-order density matrices, J. Chem. P hys. 71 (1979) 2874–2879. doi:10.1063/1.438678. 19

    work page doi:10.1063/1.438678 1979

  4. [4]

    Levy, Universal variational functionals of electron densities, first- order density matrices, and natural spin-orbitals and solu tion of the v-representability problem, Proc

    M. Levy, Universal variational functionals of electron densities, first- order density matrices, and natural spin-orbitals and solu tion of the v-representability problem, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 76 ( 12) (1979) 6062–6065. doi:10.1088/0022-3719/12/3/015

    work page doi:10.1088/0022-3719/12/3/015 1979

  5. [5]

    S. M. Valone, Consequences of extending 1 matrix energy f unctionals pure-state representable to all ensemble representable 1 m atrices, J. Chem. Phys. 73 (3) (1980) 1344–1349. doi:10.1063/1.440249

    doi:10.1063/1.440249 1980

  6. [6]

    Piris, Exploring the potential of natural orbital fun ctionals, Chemical Science 15 (2024) 17284–17291

    M. Piris, Exploring the potential of natural orbital fun ctionals, Chemical Science 15 (2024) 17284–17291. doi:10.1039/d4sc05810k

    doi:10.1039/d4sc05810k 2024

  7. [7]

    J. F. H. Lew-Yee, M. Piris, J. M. del Campo, Resolution of t he identity approximation applied to pnof correlation calculations, J . Chem. Phys. 154 (2021) 064102. doi:10.1063/5.0036404

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0036404 2021

  8. [8]

    Lemke, J

    Y. Lemke, J. Kussmann, C. Ochsenfeld, Efficient integral- direct methods for self-consistent reduced density matrix functional the ory calculations on central and graphics processing units, J. Chem. Theory Co mput. 18 (2022) 4229–4244. doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.2c00231

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.2c00231 2022

Show all 58 references
  1. [9]

    J. F. H. Lew-Yee, J. M. del Campo, M. Piris, Electron corre lation in the iron(ii) porphyrin by natural orbital functional approxim ations, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 19 (2023) 211–220. doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.2c01093

    2023 doi

  2. [10]

    Lopez, F

    X. Lopez, F. Ruipérez, M. Piris, J. M. Matxain, J. M. Ugal de, Diradicals and diradicaloids in natural orbital functional theory., C hemPhysChem 12 (2011) 1061–1065. doi:10.1002/cphc.201100136

    2011 doi

  3. [11]

    Ruipérez, M

    F. Ruipérez, M. Piris, J. M. Ugalde, J. M. Matxain, The na tural orbital functional theory of the bonding in cr(2), mo(2) and w(2)., P hys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 15 (2013) 2055–2062. doi:10.1039/c2cp43559d

    2013 doi

  4. [12]

    Ramos-Cordoba, X

    E. Ramos-Cordoba, X. Lopez, M. Piris, E. Matito, H4: A ch allenging system for natural orbital functional approximations, J. C hem. Phys. 143 (2015) 164112. doi:10.1063/1.4934799

    2015 doi

  5. [13]

    Mitxelena, M

    I. Mitxelena, M. Piris, M. Rodriguez-Mayorga, M. A. R. M ay- orga, On the performance of natural orbital functional appr oxima- tions in hubbard model, J. Phys.: Cond. Matt. 29 (2017) 42560 2. doi:10.1088/1361-648X/aa80ca. 20

    2017 doi

  6. [14]

    Lopez, M

    X. Lopez, M. Piris, Performance of the nof-mp2 method in hy- drogen abstraction reactions, Theor. Chem. Acc. 138 (2019) 89. doi:10.1007/s00214-019-2475-5

    2019 doi

  7. [15]

    Mitxelena, M

    I. Mitxelena, M. Piris, An efficient method for strongly c orrelated electrons in one dimension, J. Phys.: Cond. Matt. 32 (2020) 1 7LT01. doi:10.1088/1361-648X/ab6d11

    2020 doi

  8. [16]

    Mitxelena, M

    I. Mitxelena, M. Piris, An efficient method for strongly c orrelated electrons in two-dimensions, J. Chem. Phys. 152 (2020) 0641 08. doi:10.1063/1.5140985

    2020 doi

  9. [17]

    Mitxelena, M

    I. Mitxelena, M. Piris, Benchmarking gnof against fci i n challenging systems in one, two, and three dimensions, J. Chem. Phys. 156 (2022) 214102. doi:10.1063/5.0092611

    2022 doi

  10. [18]

    Mitxelena, M

    I. Mitxelena, M. Piris, Assessing the global natural or bital functional approximation on model systems with strong correlation, J. Chem. Phys. 160 (2024) 204106–8. doi:10.1063/5.0207325

    2024 doi

  11. [19]

    Chatterjee, K

    K. Chatterjee, K. Pernal, Excitation energies from ext ended ran- dom phase approximation employed with approximate one- and two- electron reduced density matrices, J. Chem. Phys. 137 (2012 ) 204109. doi:10.1063/1.4766934

    2012 doi

  12. [20]

    J. F. H. Lew-Yee, I. A. Bonfil-Rivera, M. Piris, J. M. del C ampo, Excited states by coupling piris natural orbital functiona ls with the extended random-phase approximation, J. Chem. Theory Comp ut. 20 (2024) 2140–2151. doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.3c01194

    2024 doi

  13. [21]

    Rivero-Santamaría, M

    A. Rivero-Santamaría, M. Piris, Time evolution of natu ral orbitals in ab initio molecular dynamics, J. Chem. Phys. 160 (2024) 07 1102. doi:10.1063/5.0188491

    2024 doi

  14. [22]

    Piris, X

    M. Piris, X. Lopez, J. M. Ugalde, Time-resolved chemica l bonding struc- ture evolution by direct-dynamics chemical simulations, J . Phys. Chem. Lett. (2024) 12138–12143. doi:10.1021/acs.jpclett.4c03010

    2024 doi

  15. [23]

    J. F. H. Lew-Yee, M. Piris, J. M. Campo, Outstanding impr ovement in removing the delocalization error by global natural orbita l functional, J. Chem. Phys. 158 (2023) 084110. doi:10.1063/5.0137378. 21

    2023 doi

  16. [24]

    J. F. H. Lew-Yee, J. M. del Campo, M. Piris, Advancing Nat ural Orbital Functional Calculations Through Deep Learning-Inspired T echniques for Large-Scale Strongly Correlated Electron Systems, Phy s. Rev. Lett. (2025). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2411.18493

    2025 doi arXiv

  17. [25]

    P. O. Löwdin, Quantum Theory of Many-Particle Systems. I. Physical Interpretations by Means of Density Matrices, Nat u- ral Spin-Orbitals, and Convergence Problems in the Method of Configurational Interaction, Phys. Rev. 97 (1955) 1474–1 489. doi:10.48550/10.1103/PhysRev.97.1474

    1955 doi

  18. [26]

    Piris, Natural Orbital Functional Theory, in Reduce d-Density-Matrix Mechanics: With Applications to many-electron atoms and mo lecules, edited by D

    M. Piris, Natural Orbital Functional Theory, in Reduce d-Density-Matrix Mechanics: With Applications to many-electron atoms and mo lecules, edited by D. A. Mazziotti, Advances in Chemical Physics, Vol . 134, Ch. 14, pp. 387–427, John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey, US A, ...

    2007 doi

  19. [27]

    Pernal, K

    K. Pernal, K. J. H. Giesbertz, Reduced density matrix fu nctional theory (rdmft) and linear response time-dependent rdmft (td-rdmf t), Top Curr Chem 368 (2016) 125–184. doi:10.1007/128_2015_624

    2016 doi

  20. [28]

    Schade, E

    R. Schade, E. Kamil, P. Blöchl, Reduced density-matrix functionals from many-particle theory, Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top. 226 (2017) 26 77–2692. doi:10.1140/epjst/e2017-70046-0

    2017 doi

  21. [29]

    Piris, Advances in approximate natural orbital func tionals: From historical perspectives to contemporary developments, Ad v

    M. Piris, Advances in approximate natural orbital func tionals: From historical perspectives to contemporary developments, Ad v. Quantum Chem. 90 (2024) 15–66. doi:10.1016/bs.aiq.2024.04.002

    2024 doi

  22. [30]

    Piris, A new approach for the two-electron cumulant i n natural orbital, Int

    M. Piris, A new approach for the two-electron cumulant i n natural orbital, Int. J. Quantum Chem. 106 (2006) 1093–1104 . doi:10.1002/qua.20858

    2006 doi

  23. [31]

    Piris, X

    M. Piris, X. Lopez, J. M. Ugalde, Dispersion interactio ns within the Piris natural orbital functional theory: the helium dimer, J. Che m. Phys. 126 (2207) 214103. doi:10.1063/1.2743019

    doi

  24. [32]

    Piris, J

    M. Piris, J. M. Matxain, X. Lopez, J. M. Ugalde, Communic ations: Ac- curate description of atoms and molecules by natural orbita l functional theory, J. Chem. Phys. 132 (2010) 031103. doi:10.1063/1.3298694. 22

    2010 doi

  25. [33]

    Piris, J

    M. Piris, J. M. Matxain, X. Lopez, J. M. Ugalde, Communic a- tions: The role of the positivity N-representability condi tions in nat- ural orbital functional theory, J. Chem. Phys. 133 (2010) 11 1101. doi:10.1063/1.3481578

    2010 doi

  26. [34]

    Piris, X

    M. Piris, X. Lopez, F. Ruipérez, J. M. Matxain, J. M. Ugal de, A natural orbital functional for multiconfigurational states., J. Ch em. Phys. 134 (2011) 164102. doi:10.1063/1.3582792

    2011 doi

  27. [35]

    Piris, J

    M. Piris, J. M. Matxain, X. Lopez, The intrapair electro n correlation in natural orbital functional theory, J. Chem. Phys. 139 (20 13) 234109. doi:10.1063/1.4844075

    doi

  28. [36]

    Piris, Interacting pairs in natural orbital functio nal theory, J

    M. Piris, Interacting pairs in natural orbital functio nal theory, J. Chem. Phys. 141 (2014) 044107. doi:10.1063/1.4890653

    2014 doi

  29. [37]

    Piris, Global method for electron correlation, Phys

    M. Piris, Global method for electron correlation, Phys . Rev. Lett. 119 (2017) 063002–5. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.063002

    2017 doi

  30. [38]

    Phase D ilemma in Nat- ural Orbital Functional Theory from the N-representabilit y Perspective

    I. Mitxelena, M. Rodríguez-Mayorga, M. Piris, “Phase D ilemma in Nat- ural Orbital Functional Theory from the N-representabilit y Perspective”, Eur. Phys. J. B 91 (2018) 109. doi:10.1140/epjb/e2018-90078-8

    2018 doi

  31. [39]

    Piris, Global natural orbital functional: Towards t he complete de- scription of the electron correlation, Physical Review Let ters 127 (2021) 233001

    M. Piris, Global natural orbital functional: Towards t he complete de- scription of the electron correlation, Physical Review Let ters 127 (2021) 233001. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.233001

    2021 doi

  32. [40]

    Piris, The role of the N-representability in one- particle functional theories, Springer, 2018, pp

    M. Piris, The role of the N-representability in one- particle functional theories, Springer, 2018, pp. 261–278 . doi:10.1007/978-3-319-72374-7_22

    2018 doi

  33. [41]

    T. T. Nguyen-Dang, E. V. Ludena, Y. Tal, Variation of the energy functional of the reduced first-order density op- erator, J. Mol. Struct.: THEOCHEM 120 (1985) 247–264. doi:10.1016/0166-1280(85)85114-9

    1985 doi

  34. [42]

    Schilling, Communication: Relating the pure and ens emble density matrix functional, J

    C. Schilling, Communication: Relating the pure and ens emble density matrix functional, J. Chem. Phys. 149 (2018) 231102 . doi:10.1063/1.5080088. 23

    2018 doi

  35. [43]

    G. V. Oleg, K. Pernal, Approximating one-matrix functi onals with- out generalized Pauli constraints, Phys. Rev. A 100 (2019) 0 12509. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.100.012509

    2019 doi

  36. [44]

    Husimi, Some formal properties of the density ma- trix, Proc

    K. Husimi, Some formal properties of the density ma- trix, Proc. Phys. Math. Soc. Jpn. 22 (1940) 264–314. doi:10.11429/ppmsj1919.22.4_264

    1940 doi

  37. [45]

    D. A. Mazziotti, Structure of fermionic density matric es: Complete n-representability conditions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 (2012 ) 263002. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.263002

    2012 doi

  38. [46]

    Piris, A generalized self-consistent-field procedu re in the improved BCS theory, J

    M. Piris, A generalized self-consistent-field procedu re in the improved BCS theory, J. Math. Chem. 25 (1999) 47–54. doi:10.1023/A:1019111828412

    1999 doi

  39. [47]

    Rodríguez-Mayorga, P

    M. Rodríguez-Mayorga, P. F. Loos, F. Bruneval, L. Vissc her, Time- Reversal Symmetry in RDMFT and pCCD with Complex-Valued Or- bitals, arXiv:2410.03620. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2410.03620

    doi arXiv

  40. [48]

    Piris, A natural orbital functional based on an expli cit approach of the two-electron cumulant, Int

    M. Piris, A natural orbital functional based on an expli cit approach of the two-electron cumulant, Int. J. Quantum Chem. 113 (2013) 620–630. doi:10.1002/qua.24020

    2013 doi

  41. [49]

    Piris, J

    M. Piris, J. M. Ugalde, Perspective on natural orbital f unctional theory, Int. J. Quantum Chem. 114 (2014) 1169–1175. doi:10.1002/qua.24663. URL http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/qua.24663

    2014 doi

  42. [50]

    Mitxelena, M

    I. Mitxelena, M. Piris, J. J. M. Ugalde, Advances in appr oximate natural orbital functional theory, Vol. 79, Academic Press, 2019, p p. 155–177. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aiq.2019.04.001

    2019 doi

  43. [51]

    Piris, The Electron Pairing Approach in Natural Orbi tal Functional Theory, Apple Academic Press, 2018, pp

    M. Piris, The Electron Pairing Approach in Natural Orbi tal Functional Theory, Apple Academic Press, 2018, pp. 593–620 . doi:10.1201/9781351170963

    2018 doi

  44. [52]

    Piris, I

    M. Piris, I. Mitxelena, DoNOF: An open-source implemen tation of natural-orbital-functional-based Comput. Phys. Commun. 259 (2021) 107651. URL https://github.com/DoNOF/DoNOFsw 24

    2021

  45. [53]

    A. J. Coleman, Structure of Fermion Density Matrices, R ev. Mod. Phys. 35 (1963) 668–687. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.35.668

    1963 doi

  46. [54]

    Piris, J

    M. Piris, J. M. Ugalde, Iterative diagonalization for o rbital optimization in natural orbital functional theory, J. Comput. Chem. 30 (2 009) 2078–

  47. [55]

    Franco, I

    L. Franco, I. A. Bonfil-Rivera, J. F. Huan Lew-Yee, M. Pir is, J. M Del Campo, R. A. Vargas-Hernández, Softmax parameteriz a- tion of the occupation numbers for natural orbital function als based on electron pairing approaches, J. Chem. Phys. 160 (2024) 24 4107. doi:10.1063/5.0213719

    2024 doi

  48. [56]

    Piris, Natural orbital functional for multiplets, P hys

    M. Piris, Natural orbital functional for multiplets, P hys. Rev. A 100 (2019) 32508. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.100.032508

    2019 doi

  49. [57]

    T. H. Dunning, T. H. D. Jr., Gaussian basis sets for use in correlated molecular calculations. i. the atoms boron through neon and hydrogen, J. Chem. Phys. 90 (1989) 1007–1023. doi:10.1063/1.456153. 25

    1989 doi

  50. [2086]

    doi:10.1002/jcc.21225

    doi

Pith tools

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