Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 66 references

Equation of state of solid parahydrogen using ab initio two-body and three-body interaction potentials

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Pair-plus-three-body forces underestimate solid hydrogen pressure, and the paper argues that accurate simulation will require four-body interactions or a treatment beyond static point molecules.

desk verdict Careful PIMC study of solid p-H2 EOS, but the high-density claim that pair+3B is far too attractive rests on an unvalidated short-range extrapolation of the 3B PES and an overparameterized fit. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.03352 v1 pith:BCDTAZUH submitted 2025-06-03 physics.chem-ph

Alexander Ibrahim , Pierre-Nicholas Roy This is my paper
classification physics.chem-ph
keywords parahydrogenequationofstatepath-integralMonteCarlothree-bodyinteractionmany-bodyforcesquantumsolidabinitiopotentialpressure-densityrelation
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

Solid parahydrogen is the simplest quantum molecular solid, and its equation of state is a testbed for first-principles many-body modelling. This paper computes that equation of state at 4.2 K from 0.024 to 0.1 Å$^{-3}$ using path-integral Monte Carlo with an ab initio pair potential and a newly built ab initio three-body potential. The pair potential alone overestimates the experimental pressure; adding the three-body term overcorrects so strongly that the pressure is severely underestimated, and the combined interaction is far too attractive at high densities. The paper reads this as evidence that three-body forces are not sufficient: accurate simulations will need four-body and higher-order many-body terms, or a treatment that abandons static point-like molecules. A sympathetic reader would care because this identifies where the many-body expansion for a quantum crystal breaks down, and it shows that a wrong-looking equation of state can arise from missing higher-order attractions rather than from the pair potential alone.

What carries the argument

The machinery is a path-integral Monte Carlo simulation of an hcp lattice of point parahydrogen molecules at 4.2 K, using the FSH pair potential and the group's recently published ab initio three-body potential, with the three-body term handled either fully in the sampling or perturbatively in the energy estimator. Tail corrections for both potentials remove finite-size error, and Trotter error is removed by extrapolation near equilibrium or by a suitably small imaginary-time step at higher densities. The load-bearing comparison is between three energy curves, pair-only, pair-plus-perturbative-three-body, and pair-plus-fully-included-three-body, whose density derivatives give the pressure.

What would settle it

Run the same calculation with a four-body interaction surface included; if the pressure returns to the experimental curve despite the three-body term, the many-body expansion is the answer, whereas if it does not, the three-body potential itself or the static point-molecule approximation is at fault. A cheaper check is to restrict the simulation to densities where every triangle side stays above the three-body potential's 2.2 Å training limit and see whether the underestimate persists.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central finding is that the ab initio three-body interaction potential for parahydrogen, when combined with the FSH pair potential, makes solid parahydrogen too soft at high densities. In its own words, the combination is far too attractive at high densities, and the resulting pressure-density curve severely underestimates the experimental data above roughly 0.04 Å$^{-3}$. The pair potential alone goes the other way, overestimating pressure even near the equilibrium density; the three-body term, though attractive at short range, reverses the imbalance and pushes the predicted equilibrium density above the experimental value. The two ways of including the three-body term, full inclusion in the Monte Carlo sampling and perturbative estimation, give nearly identical total energies and pressures, so the discrepancy is not an artifact of the perturbative treatment. The paper concludes that reproducing the experimental equation of state will require four-body and possibly higher-order many-body interactions, or a fundamentally different treatment of molecular rotations and structure.

Load-bearing premise

The conclusion depends on the assumption that the three-body potential, which was fitted to configurations with at least one side longer than 2.2 Å and then extrapolated to shorter range, is still accurate for the dense solid, so the pressure underestimation is real physics rather than an artifact of the extrapolation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the pair-plus-three-body combination is indeed too attractive, three-body interactions alone cannot bridge the pair-only and experimental equations of state at high density.
  • Accurate high-density simulations will need explicit four-body and higher-order many-body terms, and those terms must act repulsively to correct the underestimate.
  • The near-equivalence of perturbative and full-inclusion treatments means the three-body term can be treated as a density-dependent background energy for total-energy properties, cutting sampling cost by roughly a factor of 40.
  • The overcorrected equilibrium density (0.02646 Å$^{-3}$ versus the experimental 0.0260 Å$^{-3}$) shows the three-body term's attractiveness is already too strong at low pressures, so the problem is not confined to the highest densities.
  • Static point-molecule potentials, even with three-body terms, may be fundamentally inadequate for dense solid parahydrogen, and explicit rotational degrees of freedom are a candidate remedy.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Inference: If higher-order many-body terms alternate in sign, a softened effective pair potential could accidentally reproduce the experimental equation of state while hiding the missing physics; a test would be to check whether the individual kinetic and potential energy components match experiment, not just the total pressure.
  • Inference: The short-range extrapolation of the three-body surface below its 2.2 Å training limit is the most exposed link, and comparing against explicit four-body ab initio calculations in the same region would reveal whether the extrapolated attraction is the source of the underestimate.
  • Inference: The same perturbative-versus-full-inclusion strategy could be applied to liquid parahydrogen or to deuterium, where the larger mass reduces zero-point motion and should sharpen whatever many-body terms are missing.
  • Inference: If the pressure underestimate is caused by the static treatment of rotations, then a calculation with explicit rotational path integrals should raise the pressure at fixed density without adding any many-body terms.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports path-integral Monte Carlo calculations of the equation of state of solid parahydrogen at 4.2 K for densities from 0.024 to 0.1 Å^-3. The simulations use the ab initio FSH pair potential and a recently published ab initio three-body potential, with finite-size tail corrections for both pair and three-body interactions and Trotter-error control either by extrapolation or by a small imaginary-time step. The authors compare a perturbative inclusion of the three-body interaction with full inclusion in the sampling, and find nearly identical total energies. The central result is that the pair potential alone overestimates the experimental pressure, while adding the three-body interaction strongly underestimates it, with an unphysical pressure downturn above about 0.08 Å^-3. The authors conclude that accurate simulations may require four-body or higher-order many-body interactions, or that static point-molecule potentials may be unsuitable at high densities.

Significance. If the central claim is correct, the paper is significant: it challenges the common assumption that pair plus three-body ab initio potentials are sufficient for dense quantum molecular solids, and it carefully quantifies the difference between perturbative and full inclusion of three-body forces. The methodology is a strength: finite-size corrections are validated by comparing N=180 and N=448 systems, Trotter errors are handled explicitly, and the full-inclusion versus perturbative comparison is a useful benchmark. However, the headline conclusion rests on the accuracy of the three-body potential in a density regime where that potential is extrapolated far outside its training data, and the pressure curves are obtained by differentiating a high-order polynomial fit. These load-bearing issues must be addressed before the physical conclusion can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. II (three-body PES) and Sec. IVB] The three-body PES is trained only for triangles with at least one side length greater than 2.2 Å, with the short-range behavior imposed by a phenomenological exponential extrapolation. At densities above roughly 0.04 Å^-3 the hcp nearest-neighbor distance falls below 2.2 Å, and at 0.1 Å^-3 it is about 1.7 Å. The high-density pressure, and the claim that the pair-plus-three-body combination is 'far too attractive,' are therefore controlled by an unvalidated extrapolation of V3. The statement in Sec. II that 'even at the highest densities relevant to the findings of this paper, the parahydrogen molecules spend very little time at such short distances' is not consistent with the geometry at those densities. Please provide a sensitivity test of the pressure to the short-range extrapolation (for example, a modified damping or a bounded uncertainty from the extrapolation), new ab initio three-body energies in the short-range region, or restrict the central conclusion to densities where the training data are adequate.
  2. [Sec. IVB, Eq. (8)] The pressure is obtained by differentiating a seven-parameter Birch fit, Eq. (7), and the reported 'unphysical decrease' beyond 0.08 Å^-3 is a property of the fitted curve rather than of the raw energy data. A high-order polynomial fit can easily develop spurious negative curvature near the edge of its fitting range, especially since the FSH-[2B+3B] energies cover only 0.0617 to 0.1 Å^-3. The authors should verify the downturn with a direct pressure estimator (for example, a virial estimator or numerical differentiation of the raw energies) or demonstrate that the fitted curve is stable under changes in the fitting function or fitting range. The general underestimation at intermediate densities is not affected by this point, but the specific 'unphysical decrease' claim is not yet supported.
  3. [Sec. II and Sec. V] The input three-body potential also relies on the adiabatic hindered-rotor approximation, a fixed bond length of 1.449 Å, and isotropic averaging. These are acknowledged in Sec. V as potential sources of inaccuracy, but their possible contribution to the high-density pressure underestimate is not bounded. The conclusion that 'static interaction potentials are entirely unsuitable' is stronger than the evidence supports unless these approximations and the short-range extrapolation are independently validated. Please either soften the conclusion to explicitly state that the result is conditional on the accuracy of the three-body PES, or provide a quantitative estimate of the uncertainty introduced by these approximations.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. IVC, Eq. (11)] Equation (11) is written as a normalized Gaussian without the r^2 factor, but the text states that the histogram has the shape of a Gaussian multiplied by r^2. Since the quantity c(r) is the distribution of distances from the centroid in three dimensions, the normalized radial distribution should contain an r^2 factor. Please correct the equation or clarify the definition, because the reported sigma/a values depend on the fitted form.
  2. [Sec. II] The discussion of the short-range training limit would be more quantitative if it included the nearest-neighbor distance as a function of density, so that the reader can see where the 2.2 Å limit lies relative to the simulated densities. This would also help reconcile the sentence about molecules spending little time at short distances with the hcp geometry at high densities.
  3. [Sec. IVA, Table I] The text notes that the FSH-[2B+3B] fit parameters are highly correlated and not very meaningful, yet the parameters are still reported with individual uncertainties. Consider omitting the individual uncertainties or reporting the full covariance matrix, since the individual error bars may be misleading.
  4. [References] References 5 and 6 both cite Phys. Rev. B volume 95, page 104518, which appears to be a duplicate or an incorrect page for one of the two entries. Please check these citations.
  5. [Figs. 6 and 7] The vertical axis labels in Figs. 6 and 7 use a placeholder 'X' and the caption explains that X is a placeholder. In the final version, please replace X with the actual energy components so the figures are self-contained.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the simulated EOS is compared against external experimental data, and neither the FSH pair potential nor the three-body PES was fitted to reproduce that EOS.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that the combination of the FSH pair potential and the ab initio three-body PES of Ref. 20 underestimates the experimental pressure at high densities. This is a falsification test against external experimental data (Refs. 47 and 48). The two interaction inputs were constructed from ab initio electronic structure methods and were not tuned to the solid parahydrogen EOS; no parameter in the present paper is adjusted to bring the simulated curve into agreement with experiment. The only fitting procedures are the Trotter extrapolation of Eq. (5) and the Birch interpolation of simulated energies in Eq. (7), both of which are internal numerical tools whose parameters carry no physical claim and are not used as predicted observables. The three-body PES is a self-citation (Ref. 20), but it is an independently published potential with its own stated construction and assumptions, including CCSD(T) energies, RKHS fitting, the adiabatic hindered rotor approximation, and a stated 2.2 Å training limit. The paper explicitly flags the short-range extrapolation and the AHR approximation as potential sources of inaccuracy, which is a validity concern rather than a circularity. The derivation chain—Hamiltonian, PIMC sampling, tail corrections, Trotter control, energy fitting, pressure derivative, and comparison to experiment—does not reduce to its own inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the accuracy of the two ab initio potentials, the validity of the static and AHR-averaged description, the hcp lattice model, the tail approximation, and the 7-parameter Birch EOS fit used to build pressure curves. No new particles or forces are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Birch EOS fit parameters for FSH-[2B] = epsilon0=16.78 cm^-1, P0=-4842.4 cm^-1 A^-3, kappa1=118465.1, kappa2=-1312002.4, kappa3=6880148.8, kappa4=-14867506.4…
    Fitted to the simulated FSH-[2B] energy-density data using Eq. (7); the pressure curve in Fig. 8 is generated from these coefficients via Eq. (8).
  • Birch EOS fit parameters for FSH-[2B(3B)] = epsilon0=18.67 cm^-1, P0=-5763.3 cm^-1 A^-3, kappa1=149565.7, kappa2=-1789644.0, kappa3=10629544.1…
    Fitted to the simulated FSH-[2B(3B)] energy-density data; used to build the main pressure curve that shows underestimation relative to experiment.
  • Birch EOS fit parameters for FSH-[2B+3B] = not reported (authors state parameters are highly correlated and not meaningful)
    Fit to the limited full-inclusion energy data set to create a pressure curve for Fig. 8; the authors themselves caution that these parameters are not meaningful.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math The path-integral Monte Carlo formalism with periodic boundary conditions correctly samples the quantum thermal density matrix.
    Invoked throughout Sec IIIA-B as the foundation of the simulation procedure and Trotter error handling.
  • domain assumption Solid parahydrogen at 4.2 K and densities up to 0.1 A^-3 remains in the hcp phase I structure, so an hcp lattice model with molecules fixed near lattice sites is adequate.
    Stated in Sec IVB, with a footnote that phase I persists below about 60 GPa, which covers the simulation range.
  • domain assumption The interaction energy is exactly additive as a sum of the FSH pair potential and the Ref 20 three-body PES; no higher-body terms are present in the model.
    The Hamiltonian in Eq. (1) is truncated at three-body terms, and the paper's conclusion is explicitly about the adequacy of this expansion.
  • ad hoc to paper The isotropic three-body PES, built with the AHR approximation and fixed bond length 1.449 A, is valid in the dense solid, and its short-range extrapolation below the 2.2 A training limit is reliable at the densities sampled.
    The PES training data start at side length 2.2 A (Sec II), and the paper argues molecules rarely sample shorter distances without quantitative support; this is load-bearing for the short-range behavior of the three-body force.
  • domain assumption The finite-size tail corrections can be computed by approximating the pair distribution outside the box as unity and the three-body distribution as a product of pair distributions.
    Used in Sec IIIC for the tail correction energies; the approximation is validated by comparing N=180 and N=448 systems, but remains an approximation at the highest densities.
  • domain assumption Bose exchanges between parahydrogen molecules can be neglected because the worm algorithm finds almost no exchanges at the simulated densities.
    Stated in Sec II; the authors treat molecules as distinguishable, which is supported by their own exchange sampling.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Equation of state of solid parahydrogen using ab initio two-body and three-body interaction potentials." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BCDTAZUH

@misc{pith2026250603352,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Equation of state of solid parahydrogen using ab initio two-body and three-body interaction potentials},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BCDTAZUH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.03352}
}
abstract

We present the equation of state (EOS) of solid parahydrogen between $ 0.024 \, {\r{A}}^{-3} $ and $ 0.1 \, {\r{A}}^{-3} $ at $ T = 4.2 $ K, calculated using path-integral Monte Carlo simulations, with ab initio two-body and three-body interaction potentials. We correct for finite size simulation errors using potential tail corrections. Trotter factorization errors are accounted for, either via extrapolation, or by using a suitably small imaginary time step. We incorporate the three-body interaction using two methods; the full inclusion method, where pair and three-body interactions are used in both Monte Carlo sampling and in the energy estimators, and the perturbative method, where three-body interactions are omitted from sampling but are still present in energy estimations. Both treatments of the three-body interaction return very similar total energies and pressures. The presence of three-body interactions has only minor effects on the structural properties of the solid. Whereas the pair interaction, on its own, significantly overestimates the pressure of solid parahydrogen, the additional presence of the three-body interaction causes a severe underestimation of the pressure. Our findings suggest that accurate simulations of solid parahydrogen require four-body and possibly higher-order many-body interactions. It may also be the case that static interaction potentials are entirely unsuitable for simulations of solid parahydrogen at high densities.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.03352 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. The potential tail correction energy per molecule [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. The radial pair distribution function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. The difference in the energy per molecule calculated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. The energy per molecule [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. The energy per particle as a function of density [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. The energy per molecule [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. The difference in energy components as a function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Normalized distribution of bead positions from the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. The ratio [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. The radial pair distribution function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. The radial centroid pair distribution function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. The radial pair distribution function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_13.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

66 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Bhandari, A

    A. Bhandari, A. P. Rollings, L. Ratto, and J. D. Weinstein, ``High-purity solid parahydrogen,'' Rev.\ Sci.\ Instr. , vol. 92, p. 073202, 2021

    2021

  2. [2]

    F. M. Mutunga, K. M. Olenyik, A. I. Strom, and D. T. Anderson, ``Hydrogen atom quantum diffusion in solid parahydrogen: The H + N _2 O cis- H N N O trans- H N N O reaction,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 154, p. 014302, 2021

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    Sheludiakov, D

    S. Sheludiakov, D. M. Lee, V. V. Khmelenko, Y. A. Dmitriev, J. J \"a rvinen, J. Ahokas, and S. Vasiliev, ``Purely spatial diffusion of H atoms in solid normal- and para-hydrogen films,'' Phys.\ Rev.\ B , vol. 105, p. 144102, 2022

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    A. I. Strom, A. Guti \'e rrez-Quintanilla, M. Chevalier, J. C. C. Cr \'e pin, and D. T. Anderson, ``Matrix isolation spectroscopy and nuclear spin conversion of propyne suspended in solid parahydrogen,'' J.\ Phys.\ Chem.\ A , vol. 124, pp. 4471--4483, 2020

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    Boninsegni, ``Computer simulations of supercooled liquid hydrogen mixtures and the possible crystallization slowdown,'' Phys.\ Rev.\ B , vol

    M. Boninsegni, ``Computer simulations of supercooled liquid hydrogen mixtures and the possible crystallization slowdown,'' Phys.\ Rev.\ B , vol. 95, p. 104518, 2017

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    Dusseault and M

    M. Dusseault and M. Boninsegni, ``Atomic displacements in quantum crystals,'' Phys.\ Rev.\ B , vol. 95, p. 104518, 2017

    2017

  7. [7]

    J. W. Leachman, R. T. Jacobsen, S. G. Penoncello, and E. W. Lemmon, ``Fundamental equations of state for parahydrogen, normal hydrogen, and orthohydrogen,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys.\ Ref.\ Data. , vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 721--748, 2009

    work page 2009

  8. [8]

    Fernandez-Alonso, C

    F. Fernandez-Alonso, C. Cabrillo, R. Fern\' a ndez-Perea, F. J. Bermejo, M. A. Gonz\' a lez, C. Mondelli, and E. Farhi, ``Solid para-hydrogen as the paradigmatic quantum crystal: T hree observables probed by ultrahigh-resolution neutron spectroscopy,'' Phys.\ Rev.\ B , vol. 86, p. 144524, 2012

    2012

Show all 66 references
  1. [9]

    I. F. Silvera, ``The solid molecular hydrogens in the condensed phase: F undamentals and static properties,'' Rev.\ Mod.\ Phys. , vol. 52, p. 393, 1980

    1980

  2. [10]

    I. F. Silvera and V. V. Goldman, ``The isotropic intermolecular potential for H _2 and D _2 in the solid and gas phases,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 69, p. 4209, 1978

    1978

  3. [11]

    U. Buck, F. Huisken, A. Kohlhase, D. Otten, and J. Schaefer, ``State resolved rotational excitation in D _2 + H _2 collisions,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 78, p. 4439, 1978

    1978

  4. [12]

    Omiyinka and M

    T. Omiyinka and M. Boninsegni, ``Pair potentials and equation of state of solid para-hydrogen to megabar pressure,'' Phys.\ Rev.\ B , vol. 88, p. 024112, 2013

    2013

  5. [13]

    Faruk, M

    N. Faruk, M. Schmidt, H. Li, R. J. Le Roy, and P.-N. Roy, ``First-principles prediction of the R aman shifts in parahydrogen clusters,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 141, p. 014310, 2014

    2014

  6. [14]

    Schmidt, J

    M. Schmidt, J. M. Fern\' a ndez, N. Faruk, M. Nooijen, R. J. Le Roy , J. H. Morilla, G. Tejeda, S. Montero, and P.-N. Roy, ``Raman vibrational shifts of small clusters of hydrogen isotopologues,'' J.\ Phys.\ Chem.\ A , vol. 119, p. 12551, 2015

    2015

  7. [15]

    Ibrahim, L

    A. Ibrahim, L. Wang, T. Halverson, R. J. Le Roy , and P.-N. Roy, ``Equation of state and first principles prediction of the vibrational matrix shift of solid parahydrogen,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 151, p. 244501, 2019

    2019

  8. [16]

    Moraldi, ``Effective pair potential for solid molecular hydrogen at high pressures,'' J.\ Low Temp.\ Phys

    M. Moraldi, ``Effective pair potential for solid molecular hydrogen at high pressures,'' J.\ Low Temp.\ Phys. , vol. 168, pp. 275--284, 2012

    2012

  9. [17]

    R. J. Hinde, ``Three-body interactions in solid parahydrogen,'' Chem.\ Phys.\ Lett. , vol. 460, pp. 141--145, 2008

    2008

  10. [18]

    Manzhos, K

    S. Manzhos, K. Nakai, and K. Yamashita, ``Three-body interactions in clusters C O --(p H _2 ) _n ,'' Chem.\ Phys.\ Lett. , vol. 493, pp. 229--233, 2010

    2010

  11. [19]

    B. M. Axilrod and E. Teller, ``Interaction of the van der W aals type between three atoms,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 11, p. 299, 1943

    1943

  12. [20]

    Ibrahim and P.-N

    A. Ibrahim and P.-N. Roy, ``Three-body potential energy surface for para-hydrogen,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 156, p. 044301, 2022

    2022

  13. [21]

    A. L. Barnes and R. J. Hinde, ``Effect of three-body interactions on the zero-temperature equation of state of H C P solid ^4 H e,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 146, p. 094510, 2017

    2017

  14. [22]

    R. A. Aziz, F. R. W. McCourt, and C. C. K. Wong, ``A new determination of the ground state interatomic potential for H e _2 ,'' Mol.\ Phys. , vol. 61, pp. 1487--1511, 1987

    1987

  15. [23]

    Cencek, K

    W. Cencek, K. Patkowski, and K. Szalewicz, ``Full-configuration interaction calculation of three-body nonadditive contribution to helium interaction potential,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 131, p. 064105, 2009

    2009

  16. [24]

    Li, P.-N

    H. Li, P.-N. Roy, and R. J. Le Roy , ``An ``adiabatic-hindered-rotor'' treatment allows para- H _2 to be treated as if it were spherical,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 133, p. 104305, 2010

    2010

  17. [25]

    Li, P.-N

    H. Li, P.-N. Roy, and R. J. Le Roy, ``Analytic M orse/long-range potential energy surfaces and predicted infrared spectra for C O _2 -- H _2 ,'' J. Chem. Phys. , vol. 132, no. 21, p. 214309, 2010

    2010

  18. [26]

    L. Wang, D. Xie, R. J. Le Roy, and P.-N. Roy, ``A new four-dimensional ab initio potential energy surface for N _2 O -- H e and vibrational band origin shifts for the N _2 O -- H e _ N clusters with N = 1-40 ,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 137, p. 104311, 2012

    2012

  19. [27]

    L. Wang, D. Xie, R. J. Le Roy , and P.-N. Roy, ``A new six-dimensional potential energy surface for H _2 -- N _2 O and its adiabatic-hindered-rotor treatment,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 139, p. 034312, 2013

    2013

  20. [28]

    Li, X.-L

    H. Li, X.-L. Zhang, R. J. Le Roy, and P.-N. Roy, ``Analytic M orse/long-range potential energy surfaces and predicted infrared spectra for C O -- H _2 dimer and frequency shifts of C O in (para- H _2 ) _ N N =1-20 clusters,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 139, p. 164315, 2013

    2013

  21. [29]

    T. Zeng, H. Li, R. J. Le Roy, and P.-N. Roy, ```` A diabatic-hindered-rotor'' treatment of the parahydrogen-water complex,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 135, p. 094304, 2011

    2011

  22. [30]

    R. J. Hinde, ``A six-dimensional H _2 -- H _2 potential energy surface for bound state spectroscopy,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 128, p. 154308, 2008

    2008

  23. [31]

    A. Marr, T. Halverson, A. Tripp, and P.-N. Roy, ``Vibrational R aman shifts of spin isomer combinations of hydrogen dimers and isotopologues,'' J.\ Phys.\ Chem.\ A , vol. 124, no. 34, pp. 6877--6888, 2020

    2020

  24. [32]

    L. D. Caballero, C. Schran, F. Brieuc, and D. Marx, ``Neural network interaction potentials for para-hydrogen with flexible molecules,'' arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.08251 , 2022

    2022 arXiv

  25. [33]

    V. I. Lebedev, ``Quadratures on a sphere,'' Zh.\ Vychisl.\ Mat.\ Mat.\ Fiz. , vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 293--306, 1976

    1976

  26. [34]

    O. T. Unke and M. Meuwly, ``Toolkit for the construction of reproducing kernel-based representations of data: A pplication to multidimensional potential energy surfaces,'' J.\ Chem.\ Inf.\ Model. , vol. 57, p. 1923, 2017

    1923

  27. [35]

    T. H. T. S. Ho, H. Rabitz, and L. B. Harding, ``Construction of reproducing kernel H ilbert space potential energy surfaces for the 1 A '' and 1 A ' states of the reaction N (^2 D ) + H _2 ,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 114, p. 3945, 2001

    2001

  28. [36]

    Zhai and S

    H. Zhai and S. Y. Lin, ``A fast hybrid method for constructing multidimensional potential energy surfaces from ab initio calculations: A new global analytic P E S of N H _2 system,'' Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 455, pp. 57--64, 2015

    2015

  29. [37]

    Koner, J

    D. Koner, J. C. S. V. Veliz, R. J. Bemish, and M. Meuwly, ``Accurate reproducing kernel-based potential energy surfaces for the triplet ground states of N _2 O and dynamics for the N + N O O + N _2 and N _2 + O 2 N + O reactions,'' Phys.\ Chem.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 22, pp. 184...

    2020

  30. [38]

    u tt, A. Tkatchenko, and K.-R. M \

    O. T. Unke, S. Chmiela, H. E. Sauceda, M. Gastegger, I. Poltavsky, K. T. Sch \"u tt, A. Tkatchenko, and K.-R. M \"u ller, ``Machine learning force fields,'' Chem.\ Rev. , vol. 121, pp. 10142--10186, 2021

    2021

  31. [39]

    Boninsegni, N

    M. Boninsegni, N. V. Prokof'ev, and B. V. Svistunov, ``Worm algorithms for continuous-space path integral M onte C arlo simulations,'' Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett. , vol. 96, p. 070601, 2006

    2006

  32. [40]

    Boninsegni, N

    M. Boninsegni, N. V. Prokof'ev, and B. V. Svistunov, ``Worm algorithm and diagrammatic M onte C arlo: A new approach to continuous-space path integral M onte C arlo simulations,'' Phys.\ Rev.\ E , vol. 74, p. 036701, 2006

    2006

  33. [41]

    Attard, ``Pair-hypernetted-chain closure for three-body potentials: R esults for argon with the A xilrod- T eller triple-dipole potential,'' Phys.\ Rev.\ A , vol

    P. Attard, ``Pair-hypernetted-chain closure for three-body potentials: R esults for argon with the A xilrod- T eller triple-dipole potential,'' Phys.\ Rev.\ A , vol. 45, no. 6, pp. 3659--3669, 1991

    1991

  34. [42]

    D. M. Ceperley, ``Path integrals in the theory of condensed helium,'' Rev.\ Mod.\ Phys. , vol. 67, p. 279, 1995

    1995

  35. [43]

    Yan and D

    Y. Yan and D. Blume, ``Path integral M onte C arlo ground state approach: F ormalism, implementation, and applications,'' J.\ Phys.\ B , vol. 50, p. 223001, 2017

    2017

  36. [44]

    del R \'i o, E

    F. del R \'i o, E. D \'i az-Herrera, O. Guzm \'a n, J. A. Moreno-Razo, and J. E. Ramos, ``Analytical equation of state with three-body forces: A pplication to noble gases,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 139, p. 184503, 2013

    2013

  37. [45]

    M. P. Allen and D. J. Tildesley, Computer simulation of liquids . Oxford University Press, 2 ed., 2017

    2017

  38. [46]

    R. E. Cohen, O. G \"u lseren, and R. J. Hemley, ``Accuracy of equation-of-state formulations,'' Am.\ Mineral. , vol. 85, pp. 338--344, 2000

    2000

  39. [47]

    Driessen, J

    A. Driessen, J. A. de Waal, and I. F. Silvera, ``Experimental determination of the equation of state of solid hydrogen and deuterium at high pressures,'' J.\ Low Temp.\ Phys. , vol. 34, p. 255, 1979

    1979

  40. [48]

    Mao and R

    H. Mao and R. J. Hemley, ``Ultrahigh-pressure transitions in solid hydrogen,'' Rev.\ Mod.\ Phys. , vol. 66, pp. 671--692, 1994

    1994

  41. [49]

    Chang and M

    S.-Y. Chang and M. Boninsegni, ``Ab initio potentials and the equation of state of condensed helium at high pressure,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 115, pp. 2629--2633, 2001

    2001

  42. [50]

    R. A. Aziz, V. P. S. Nain, J. S. Carley, W. L. Taylor, and G. T. McConville, ``An accurate intermolecular potential for helium,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 70, pp. 4330--4342, 1979

    1979

  43. [51]

    L. W. Bruch and I. J. McGee, ``Calculations and estimates of the ground state energy of helium trimers,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 59, pp. 409--413, 1973

    1973

  44. [52]

    A. R. Janzen and R. A. Aziz, ``An accurate potential energy curve for helium based on ab initio calculations,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 107, pp. 914--919, 1997

    1997

  45. [53]

    M. J. Cohen and J. N. Murrell, ``An analytic function for the three-body potential of H e _3 ,'' Chem.\ Phys.\ Lett. , vol. 260, pp. 371--376, 1996

    1996

  46. [54]

    C. J. Pickard and R. J. Needs, ``Structure of phase I I I of solid hydrogen,'' Nat. Phys. , vol. 3, pp. 473--476, 2007

    2007

  47. [55]

    Gregoryanz, C

    E. Gregoryanz, C. Ji, P. Dalladay-Simpson, B. Li, R. T. Howie, and H.-K. Mao, ``Everything you always wanted to know about metallic hydrogen but were afraid to ask,'' Matter\ Radiat.\ Extremes , vol. 5, p. 038101, 2020

    2020

  48. [56]

    Blinov and P.-N

    N. Blinov and P.-N. Roy, ``Connection between the observable and centroid structural properties of a quantum fluid: application to liquid para-hydrogen,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 120, no. 8, pp. 3759--3764, 2004

    2004

  49. [57]

    Roy and N

    P.-N. Roy and N. Blinov, ``Centroid dynamics with quantum statistics,'' Isr. J. Chem. , vol. 42, no. 2-3, pp. 183--190, 2002

    2002

  50. [58]

    W. H. Ryu, Y. Han, and G. A. Voth, ``Coarse-graining of many-boyd path integrals: T heory and numerical approximations,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 150, p. 244103, 2019

    2019

  51. [59]

    T. Cui, E. Cheng, B. J. Alder, and K. B. Whaley, ``Rotational ordering in solid deuterium and hydrogen: A path integral M onte C arlo study,'' Phys.\ Rev.\ B , vol. 55, p. 12253, 1997

    1997

  52. [60]

    Marx and M

    D. Marx and M. H. M \"u ser, ``Path integral simulations of rotors: T heory and applications,'' J.\ Phys.\ Condens.\ Matter , vol. 11, p. R117, 1999

    1999

  53. [61]

    Blinov, X

    N. Blinov, X. G. Song, and P.-N. Roy, ``Path integral M onte C arlo approach for weakly bound van der W aals complexes with rotations: A lgorithm and benchmark calculations,'' J.\ Chem.\ Phys. , vol. 120, p. 5916, 2004

    2004

  54. [62]

    Blinov and P.-N

    N. Blinov and P.-N. Roy, ``Effect of exchange on the rotational dynamics of doped helium clusters,'' J.\ Low Temp.\ Phys. , vol. 140, p. 253, 2005

    2005

  55. [63]

    T. Zeng, H. Li, and P.-N. Roy, ``Simulating asymmetric top impurities in superfluid clusters: A para-water dopant in para-hydrogen,'' J.\ Phys.\ Chem.\ Lett. , vol. 4, p. 18, 2013

    2013

  56. [64]

    T. Zeng, G. Guillon, J. T. Cantin, and P.-N. Roy, ``Probing the superfluid response of para-hydrogen with a sulfur dioxide dopant,'' J.\ Phys.\ Chem.\ Lett. , vol. 4, p. 2391, 2013

    2013

  57. [65]

    Zeng and P.-N

    T. Zeng and P.-N. Roy, ``Microscopic molecular superfluid response: theory and simulations,'' Rep.\ Prog.\ Phys. , vol. 77, p. 046601, 2014

    2014

  58. [66]

    T. Zeng, N. Blinov, G. Guillon, H. Li, K. P. Bishop, and P.-N. Roy, `` M o R i B S - P I M C : A program to simulate molecular rotors in bosonic solvents using path-integral M onte C arlo,'' Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun. , vol. 204, pp. 170--188, 2016

    2016

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.