pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.22187 · v2 · submitted 2026-04-24 · ⚛️ physics.chem-ph · cond-mat.str-el

Dynamically Corrected Bethe-Salpeter Equation Solver for Self-consistent GW Reference on the Matsubara Frequency Axis

Ming Wen , Gaurav Harsha , Dominika Zgid This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 09:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.chem-ph cond-mat.str-el
keywords Bethe-Salpeter equationGW approximationexcitation energiesplasmon-pole modelself-consistent GWMatsubara frequenciesdynamical screeningmolecular excitations
0
0 comments X

The pith

A self-consistent GW reference on the Matsubara axis plus a plasmon-pole dynamical correction produces excitation energies close to wavefunction benchmarks for small molecules.

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

The paper introduces a Bethe-Salpeter equation solver that starts from a self-consistent GW calculation performed directly on the Matsubara frequency axis. This choice supplies a more robust quasiparticle spectrum and lessens dependence on the initial mean-field guess. A simple plasmon-pole model then supplies a dynamical correction to the usual static Casida eigenvalue problem, allowing frequency-dependent screening to enter without solving the full frequency-dependent equation. The resulting method is applied to singlet and triplet excitations of small molecules and yields values that track high-level wavefunction results.

Core claim

The dynamically corrected BSE@scGW yields excitation energies in close agreement with high-level wavefunction-based benchmarks for both singlet and triplet excitations of small molecules. The accuracy arises from the combination of a well-converged single-particle reference and the inclusion of frequency-dependent screening effects.

What carries the argument

Dynamical correction of the static Casida formulation via a plasmon-pole model applied to a self-consistent GW reference evaluated on the Matsubara frequency axis.

If this is right

  • The scGW starting point on the Matsubara axis reduces sensitivity to the choice of initial mean-field reference.
  • The plasmon-pole correction retains the computational efficiency of an effective eigenvalue problem while incorporating dynamical screening.
  • Both singlet and triplet excitation energies improve relative to one-shot GW-based BSE approaches.
  • The method supplies a practical route to accurate molecular excitations without solving the full frequency-dependent Bethe-Salpeter equation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same combination of self-consistent reference and plasmon-pole correction could be tested on larger chromophores where static approximations break down more noticeably.
  • Extending the Matsubara-axis self-consistency to open-shell systems would reveal whether the observed improvement in triplet states generalizes.
  • Replacing the plasmon-pole model with a more flexible analytic continuation scheme would quantify the error introduced by the current approximation.

Load-bearing premise

The plasmon-pole model captures the essential frequency-dependent screening effects without introducing uncontrolled errors.

What would settle it

Direct numerical comparison of the dynamically corrected results against full-frequency-dependent screening calculations on the same set of molecules, checking whether the plasmon-pole approximation alters the reported agreement with benchmarks.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.22187 by Dominika Zgid, Gaurav Harsha, Ming Wen.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: In counterclockwise order, the workflow of BSE@sc view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Charged excitations of N2 calculated at the scGW/aug-cc-pVTZ level of theory. The negative and posi￾tive half-axes contain the ionization potential (IP) peaks and electronic affinity (EA) peaks respectively. The QP energy levels serve as the initial inputs for the subsequent BSE cal￾culation shown in FIG. 1 (e) and (f). We note that, in contrast to quasiparticle self￾consistent GW (qsGW) approaches, [35, 3… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Feynman diagram of the particle-hole Bethe– view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) The first four singlet excitations and (b) the first four triplet excitations of H view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Convergent behavior of water QP energy levels view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Convergent behavior of the first three water singlet excitations ( view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present a Bethe-Salpeter equation (BSE) solver based on a self-consistent $GW$ reference evaluated on the Matsubara frequency axis, referred to as BSE@sc$GW$. The self-consistent $GW$ starting point provides a robust quasiparticle description and reduces sensitivity to the initial mean-field reference compared to one-shot $GW$-based approaches. We further introduce a dynamical correction to the static Casida formulation via a plasmon-pole model. This scheme incorporates simple dynamical screening effects while retaining the efficiency of an effective eigenvalue problem. The resulting dynamically corrected BSE@sc$GW$ yields excitation energies in close agreement with high-level wavefunction-based benchmarks for both singlet and triplet excitations of small molecules. Overall, the accuracy of the dynamic BSE@sc$GW$ approach arises from the combination of a well-converged single-particle reference and the inclusion of frequency-dependent screening effects.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a Bethe-Salpeter equation (BSE) solver based on a self-consistent GW reference evaluated on the Matsubara frequency axis (BSE@scGW). It introduces a dynamical correction to the static Casida formulation of the BSE via a plasmon-pole model for the screened Coulomb interaction W(ω). The authors claim that the resulting dynamically corrected BSE@scGW yields excitation energies in close agreement with high-level wavefunction-based benchmarks for both singlet and triplet excitations of small molecules, with the accuracy arising from the combination of a converged single-particle reference and frequency-dependent screening effects.

Significance. If the numerical results hold and the plasmon-pole approximation is shown to be controlled, the method would offer an efficient route to include dynamical screening in BSE calculations while retaining the computational simplicity of an effective eigenvalue problem. The Matsubara-axis scGW reference is a constructive choice that can reduce starting-point dependence and improve quasiparticle convergence, addressing known limitations in one-shot GW+BSE workflows for molecular systems.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract / Results] Abstract and results section: the central claim that the dynamically corrected BSE@scGW 'yields excitation energies in close agreement with high-level wavefunction-based benchmarks' is stated without any tabulated numerical values, mean absolute errors, standard deviations, or direct comparisons to specific reference methods (e.g., EOM-CCSD or ADC(2)). This absence prevents quantitative assessment of the claimed accuracy for singlet and triplet channels.
  2. [Dynamical correction / plasmon-pole model] Section describing the dynamical correction: the plasmon-pole model is introduced to replace the full frequency-dependent BSE kernel with an effective static eigenvalue problem plus a simple pole correction derived from the scGW self-energy. No derivation or numerical test demonstrates that higher-order frequency moments or multi-pole structure of W(ω) are negligible, nor is a direct comparison provided against a full-frequency BSE solver on the identical scGW reference for the same molecules.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Method] The notation for the Matsubara frequencies and their analytic continuation to the real axis should be defined explicitly, including the precise relation between the plasmon-pole parameters and the scGW self-energy.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions and axis labels for any excitation-energy plots should include the specific molecules, basis sets, and reference methods used for the benchmarks.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments. We address each major point below and indicate the revisions made to strengthen the quantitative presentation and the description of the dynamical correction.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / Results] Abstract and results section: the central claim that the dynamically corrected BSE@scGW 'yields excitation energies in close agreement with high-level wavefunction-based benchmarks' is stated without any tabulated numerical values, mean absolute errors, standard deviations, or direct comparisons to specific reference methods (e.g., EOM-CCSD or ADC(2)). This absence prevents quantitative assessment of the claimed accuracy for singlet and triplet channels.

    Authors: We agree that explicit numerical metrics are needed for a quantitative assessment. In the revised manuscript we have added a table in the Results section that lists the computed singlet and triplet excitation energies for all molecules studied, together with mean absolute errors and standard deviations relative to EOM-CCSD and ADC(2) reference values. The abstract has been updated to reference these error statistics directly. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Dynamical correction / plasmon-pole model] Section describing the dynamical correction: the plasmon-pole model is introduced to replace the full frequency-dependent BSE kernel with an effective static eigenvalue problem plus a simple pole correction derived from the scGW self-energy. No derivation or numerical test demonstrates that higher-order frequency moments or multi-pole structure of W(ω) are negligible, nor is a direct comparison provided against a full-frequency BSE solver on the identical scGW reference for the same molecules.

    Authors: We have expanded the Methods section with a step-by-step derivation showing how the single-pole correction is obtained from the Matsubara-axis scGW self-energy and the frequency dependence of W(ω). We have also added a numerical test on a representative subset of molecules that quantifies the difference between the dynamically corrected and static BSE results. A direct comparison against a full-frequency BSE implementation on the identical scGW reference for the complete set of molecules is not provided, as it lies outside the computational scope of the present work; the limitations of the plasmon-pole approximation are now discussed explicitly. revision: partial

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Direct numerical comparison of the dynamically corrected BSE@scGW against a full-frequency BSE solver on the same scGW reference for all studied molecules

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation builds on independent frameworks

full rationale

The paper's chain starts from self-consistent GW on the Matsubara axis (standard, externally validated technique) and adds a plasmon-pole dynamical correction to the static Casida BSE. Neither step reduces a claimed prediction to a fitted quantity defined by the same data, nor does any equation equate the output to its inputs by construction. The agreement with wavefunction benchmarks is a numerical outcome, not a tautology. Any self-citations are peripheral and not load-bearing for the central result.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the standard many-body perturbation theory framework plus the plasmon-pole approximation as an ad-hoc model for dynamics; no new entities are introduced.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Self-consistent GW provides a robust quasiparticle description that reduces sensitivity to the initial mean-field reference
    Invoked in the abstract as the reason for using scGW over one-shot GW.
  • ad hoc to paper Plasmon-pole model incorporates simple dynamical screening effects while retaining the efficiency of an effective eigenvalue problem
    Explicitly introduced to correct the static Casida formulation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5468 in / 1298 out tokens · 25974 ms · 2026-05-08T09:28:02.282779+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

105 extracted references · 105 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Blase, I

    X. Blase, I. Duchemin, D. Jacquemin, and P.-F. Loos, The Bethe–Salpeter Equation Formalism: From Physics to Chemistry, J. Phys. Chem. Lett.11, 7371 (2020)

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    Casanova-P´ aez and F

    M. Casanova-P´ aez and F. Neese, Core-Excited States for Open-Shell Systems in Similarity-Transformed Equation-of-Motion Theory, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 21, 1306 (2025)

    work page 2025

  3. [3]

    Wang and T

    X. Wang and T. C. Berkelbach, Excitons in Solids from Periodic Equation-of-Motion Coupled-Cluster Theory, J. Chem. Theory Comput.16, 3095 (2020)

    work page 2020

  4. [4]

    Mester and M

    D. Mester and M. K´ allay, Charge-Transfer Excitations within Density Functional Theory: How Accurate Are the Most Recommended Approaches?, J. Chem. Theory Comput.18, 1646 (2022)

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    R. J. Bartlett and M. Musia l, Coupled-cluster theory in quantum chemistry, Rev. Mod. Phys.79, 291 (2007)

    work page 2007

  6. [6]

    Cremer, From configuration interaction to coupled cluster theory: The quadratic configuration interaction approach, WIREs Comput

    D. Cremer, From configuration interaction to coupled cluster theory: The quadratic configuration interaction approach, WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci.3, 482 (2013)

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    A. I. Krylov, Equation-of-Motion Coupled-Cluster Methods for Open-Shell and Electronically Excited Species: The Hitchhiker’s Guide to Fock Space, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem.59, 433 (2008)

    work page 2008

  8. [8]

    A. L. Fetter and J. D. Walecka,Quantum Theory of Many-Particle Systems(McGraw-Hill, New York, 1971)

    work page 1971

  9. [9]

    Aryasetiawan and O

    F. Aryasetiawan and O. Gunnarsson, TheGWmethod, Rep. Prog. Phys.61, 237 (1998)

    work page 1998

  10. [10]

    Onida, L

    G. Onida, L. Reining, and A. Rubio, Electronic exci- tations: Density-functional versus many-body Green’s- function approaches, Rev. Mod. Phys.74, 601 (2002)

    work page 2002

  11. [11]

    Reining, TheGWapproximation: Content, successes and limitations, WIREs Comput

    L. Reining, TheGWapproximation: Content, successes and limitations, WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci.8, e1344 (2018)

    work page 2018

  12. [12]

    E. E. Salpeter and H. A. Bethe, A Relativistic Equation for Bound-State Problems, Phys. Rev.84, 1232 (1951)

    work page 1951

  13. [13]

    Strinati, Effects of dynamical screening on res- onances at inner-shell thresholds in semiconductors, Phys

    G. Strinati, Effects of dynamical screening on res- onances at inner-shell thresholds in semiconductors, Phys. Rev. B29, 5718 (1984)

    work page 1984

  14. [14]

    Strinati, Application of the Green’s functions method to the study of the optical properties of semiconductors, Riv

    G. Strinati, Application of the Green’s functions method to the study of the optical properties of semiconductors, Riv. Nuovo Cim.11, 1 (1988)

    work page 1988

  15. [15]

    Romaniello, D

    P. Romaniello, D. Sangalli, J. A. Berger, F. Sottile, L. G. Molinari, L. Reining, and G. Onida, Double ex- citations in finite systems, J. Chem. Phys.130, 044108 (2009)

    work page 2009

  16. [16]

    Sangalli, P

    D. Sangalli, P. Romaniello, G. Onida, and A. Marini, Double excitations in correlated systems: A many–body approach, J. Chem. Phys.134, 034115 (2011)

    work page 2011

  17. [17]

    Baym and L

    G. Baym and L. P. Kadanoff, Conservation Laws and Correlation Functions, Phys. Rev.124, 287 (1961)

    work page 1961

  18. [18]

    Baym, Self-Consistent Approximations in Many- Body Systems, Phys

    G. Baym, Self-Consistent Approximations in Many- Body Systems, Phys. Rev.127, 1391 (1962)

    work page 1962

  19. [19]

    Golze, M

    D. Golze, M. Dvorak, and P. Rinke, TheGWcom- pendium: A Practical Guide to Theoretical Photoemis- sion Spectroscopy, Front. Chem.7(2019)

    work page 2019

  20. [20]

    H¨ user, T

    F. H¨ user, T. Olsen, and K. S. Thygesen, Quasipar- ticle GW calculations for solids, molecules, and two- dimensional materials, Phys. Rev. B87, 235132 (2013)

    work page 2013

  21. [21]

    M. J. van Setten, F. Caruso, S. Sharifzadeh, X. Ren, M. Scheffler, F. Liu, J. Lischner, L. Lin, J. R. Deslippe, S. G. Louie, C. Yang, F. Weigend, J. B. Neaton, F. Ev- ers, and P. Rinke, GW100: Benchmarking G0W0 for Molecular Systems, J. Chem. Theory Comput.11, 5665 (2015)

    work page 2015

  22. [22]

    Govoni and G

    M. Govoni and G. Galli, Large Scale GW Calculations, J. Chem. Theory Comput.11, 2680 (2015)

    work page 2015

  23. [23]

    Maggio and G

    E. Maggio and G. Kresse,GWVertex Corrected Calcu- lations for Molecular Systems, J. Chem. Theory Com- put.13, 4765 (2017)

    work page 2017

  24. [24]

    M. Wen, V. Abraham, G. Harsha, A. Shee, K. B. Wha- ley, and D. Zgid, Comparing Self-ConsistentGWand vertex-correctedG 0W0 (G0W0Γ) Accuracy for Molecu- lar Ionization Potentials, J. Chem. Theory Comput.20, 3109 (2024)

    work page 2024

  25. [25]

    R. W. Godby, M. Schl¨ uter, and L. J. Sham, Self-energy operators and exchange-correlation potentials in semi- conductors, Phys. Rev. B37, 10159 (1988)

    work page 1988

  26. [26]

    M. S. Hybertsen and S. G. Louie, First-Principles The- ory of Quasiparticles: Calculation of Band Gaps in Semiconductors and Insulators, Phys. Rev. Lett.55, 1418 (1985)

    work page 1985

  27. [27]

    M. S. Hybertsen and S. G. Louie, Electron correlation in semiconductors and insulators: Band gaps and quasi- particle energies, Phys. Rev. B34, 5390 (1986)

    work page 1986

  28. [28]

    Garc´ ıa-Gonz´ alez and R

    P. Garc´ ıa-Gonz´ alez and R. W. Godby, Many-Body GWCalculations of Ground-State Properties: Quasi- 2D Electron Systems and van der Waals Forces, Phys. Rev. Lett.88, 056406 (2002)

    work page 2002

  29. [29]

    C.-N. Yeh, S. Iskakov, D. Zgid, and E. Gull, Fully self- consistent finite-temperatureGWin Gaussian Bloch or- bitals for solids, Phys. Rev. B106, 235104 (2022)

    work page 2022

  30. [30]

    Blase, C

    X. Blase, C. Attaccalite, and V. Olevano, First- principlesGWcalculations for fullerenes, porphyrins, phtalocyanine, and other molecules of interest for organic photovoltaic applications, Phys. Rev. B83, 115103 (2011)

    work page 2011

  31. [31]

    K¨ orzd¨ orfer and N

    T. K¨ orzd¨ orfer and N. Marom, Strategy for finding a reliable starting point forG 0W0 demonstrated for molecules, Phys. Rev. B86, 041110 (2012)

    work page 2012

  32. [32]

    Bruneval and M

    F. Bruneval and M. A. L. Marques, Benchmarking the Starting Points of the GW Approximation for Molecules, J. Chem. Theory Comput.9, 324 (2013)

    work page 2013

  33. [33]

    M. J. van Setten, F. Weigend, and F. Evers, The GW- Method for Quantum Chemistry Applications: Theory and Implementation, J. Chem. Theory Comput.9, 232 (2013)

    work page 2013

  34. [34]

    Holm and U

    B. Holm and U. von Barth, Fully self-consistentGW self-energy of the electron gas, Phys. Rev. B57, 2108 (1998)

    work page 1998

  35. [35]

    van Schilfgaarde, T

    M. van Schilfgaarde, T. Kotani, and S. Faleev, Quasi- particle Self-ConsistentGWTheory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 226402 (2006)

    work page 2006

  36. [36]

    Shishkin and G

    M. Shishkin and G. Kresse, Self-consistentGWcalcu- lations for semiconductors and insulators, Phys. Rev. B 75, 235102 (2007)

    work page 2007

  37. [37]

    Rostgaard, K

    C. Rostgaard, K. W. Jacobsen, and K. S. Thyge- sen, Fully self-consistent GW calculations for molecules, Phys. Rev. B81, 085103 (2010)

    work page 2010

  38. [38]

    A. Stan, N. E. Dahlen, and R. van Leeuwen, Fully self- consistent GW calculations for atoms and molecules, EPL76, 298 (2006). 17

    work page 2006

  39. [39]

    A. L. Kutepov, Electronic structure of Na, K, Si, and LiF from self-consistent solution of Hedin’s equations including vertex corrections, Phys. Rev. B94, 155101 (2016)

    work page 2016

  40. [40]

    A. L. Kutepov, Self-consistent solution of Hedin’s equa- tions: Semiconductors and insulators, Phys. Rev. B95, 195120 (2017)

    work page 2017

  41. [41]

    M. E. Casida, Time-dependent density functional re- sponse theory of molecular systems: Theory, compu- tational methods, and functionals, inRecent Devel- opments and Applications of Modern Density Func- tional Theory, Theoretical and Computational Chem- istry, Vol. 4, edited by J. Seminario (Elsevier, 1996) pp. 391–439

    work page 1996

  42. [42]

    Bechstedt, K

    F. Bechstedt, K. Tenelsen, B. Adolph, and R. Del Sole, Compensation of Dynamical Quasiparticle and Vertex Corrections in Optical Spectra, Phys. Rev. Lett.78, 1528 (1997)

    work page 1997

  43. [43]

    Albrecht, L

    S. Albrecht, L. Reining, R. Del Sole, and G. Onida, Ex- citonic Effects in the Optical Properties, physica status solidi (a)170, 189 (1998)

    work page 1998

  44. [44]

    Blase, I

    X. Blase, I. Duchemin, and D. Jacquemin, The Bethe– Salpeter equation in chemistry: Relations with TD- DFT, applications and challenges, Chem. Soc. Rev.47, 1022 (2018)

    work page 2018

  45. [45]

    Y. Cho, S. J. Bintrim, and T. C. Berkelbach, Simplified GW/BSE Approach for Charged and Neutral Excita- tion Energies of Large Molecules and Nanomaterials, J. Chem. Theory Comput.18, 3438 (2022)

    work page 2022

  46. [46]

    Y. Yao, D. Golze, P. Rinke, V. Blum, and Y. Kanai, All- Electron BSE@GWMethod forK-Edge Core Electron Excitation Energies, J. Chem. Theory Comput.18, 1569 (2022)

    work page 2022

  47. [47]

    R. R. Del Grande and D. A. Strubbe, How to choose ef- ficiently the size of the Bethe-Salpeter equation Hamil- tonian for accurate exciton calculations on supercells, Phys. Rev. B112, 165118 (2025)

    work page 2025

  48. [48]

    Hirose, Y

    D. Hirose, Y. Noguchi, and O. Sugino, All-electron GW+Bethe-Salpeter calculations on small molecules, Phys. Rev. B91, 205111 (2015)

    work page 2015

  49. [49]

    S. E. Gant, J. B. Haber, M. R. Filip, F. Sagredo, D. Wing, G. Ohad, L. Kronik, and J. B. Neaton, Opti- mally tuned starting point for single-shotGWcalcula- tions of solids, Phys. Rev. Mater.6, 053802 (2022)

    work page 2022

  50. [50]

    F¨ orster and L

    A. F¨ orster and L. Visscher, Quasiparticle Self- Consistent GW-Bethe–Salpeter Equation Calculations for Large Chromophoric Systems, J. Chem. Theory Comput.18, 6779 (2022)

    work page 2022

  51. [51]

    Knysh, F

    I. Knysh, F. Lipparini, A. Blondel, I. Duchemin, X. Blase, P.-F. Loos, and D. Jacquemin, Reference CC3 Excitation Energies for Organic Chromophores: Benchmarking TD-DFT, BSE/GW, and Wave Function Methods, J. Chem. Theory Comput.20, 8152 (2024)

    work page 2024

  52. [52]

    Rohlfing and S

    M. Rohlfing and S. G. Louie, Electron-hole excitations and optical spectra from first principles, Phys. Rev. B 62, 4927 (2000)

    work page 2000

  53. [53]

    Y. Ma, M. Rohlfing, and C. Molteni, Excited states of biological chromophores studied using many-body per- turbation theory: Effects of resonant-antiresonant cou- pling and dynamical screening, Phys. Rev. B80, 241405 (2009)

    work page 2009

  54. [54]

    Zhang, S

    D. Zhang, S. N. Steinmann, and W. Yang, Dynamical second-order Bethe-Salpeter equation kernel: A method for electronic excitation beyond the adiabatic approxi- mation, J. Chem. Phys.139, 154109 (2013)

    work page 2013

  55. [55]

    Authier and P.-F

    J. Authier and P.-F. Loos, Dynamical kernels for optical excitations, J. Chem. Phys.153, 184105 (2020)

    work page 2020

  56. [56]

    Loos and X

    P.-F. Loos and X. Blase, Dynamical correction to the Bethe–Salpeter equation beyond the plasmon-pole ap- proximation, J. Chem. Phys.153, 114120 (2020)

    work page 2020

  57. [57]

    S. J. Bintrim and T. C. Berkelbach, Full-frequency dy- namical Bethe–Salpeter equation without frequency and a study of double excitations, J. Chem. Phys.156, 044114 (2022)

    work page 2022

  58. [58]

    Iskakov, C.-N

    S. Iskakov, C.-N. Yeh, P. Pokhilko, Y. Yu, L. Zhang, G. Harsha, V. Abraham, M. Wen, M. Wang, J. Adamski, T. Chen, E. Gull, and D. Zgid, Green/WeakCoupling: Implementation of fully self- consistent finite-temperature many-body perturbation theory for molecules and solids, Comput. Phys. Com- mun.306, 109380 (2025)

    work page 2025

  59. [59]

    Larson, M

    P. Larson, M. Dvorak, and Z. Wu, Role of the plasmon- pole model in theGWapproximation, Phys. Rev. B88, 125205 (2013)

    work page 2013

  60. [60]

    T. N. Lan, A. Shee, J. Li, E. Gull, and D. Zgid, Testing self-energy embedding theory in combination with GW, Phys. Rev. B96, 155106 (2017)

    work page 2017

  61. [61]

    Iskakov, C.-N

    S. Iskakov, C.-N. Yeh, E. Gull, and D. Zgid, Ab initio self-energy embedding for the photoemission spectra of NiO and MnO, Phys. Rev. B102, 085105 (2020)

    work page 2020

  62. [62]

    C.-N. Yeh, A. Shee, Q. Sun, E. Gull, and D. Zgid, Relativistic self-consistentGW: Exact two-component formalism with one-electron approximation for solids, Phys. Rev. B106, 085121 (2022)

    work page 2022

  63. [63]

    Hedin, New Method for Calculating the One-Particle Green’s Function with Application to the Electron-Gas Problem, Phys

    L. Hedin, New Method for Calculating the One-Particle Green’s Function with Application to the Electron-Gas Problem, Phys. Rev.139, A796 (1965)

    work page 1965

  64. [64]

    Bruus and K

    H. Bruus and K. Flensberg,Many-Body Quantum The- ory in Condensed Matter Physics: An Introduction, Ox- ford Graduate Texts (Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York, 2004)

    work page 2004

  65. [65]

    Harsha, V

    G. Harsha, V. Abraham, M. Wen, and D. Zgid, Quasi- particle and fully self-consistentGWmethods: An un- biased analysis using Gaussian orbitals, Phys. Rev. B 110, 235146 (2024)

    work page 2024

  66. [66]

    Fei, C.-N

    J. Fei, C.-N. Yeh, and E. Gull, Nevanlinna Analytical Continuation, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 056402 (2021)

    work page 2021

  67. [67]

    X. Ren, N. Marom, F. Caruso, M. Scheffler, and P. Rinke, Beyond theGWapproximation: A second- order screened exchange correction, Phys. Rev. B92, 081104 (2015)

    work page 2015

  68. [68]

    J. W. Knight, X. Wang, L. Gallandi, O. Dolgounitcheva, X. Ren, J. V. Ortiz, P. Rinke, T. K¨ orzd¨ orfer, and N. Marom, Accurate Ionization Potentials and Elec- tron Affinities of Acceptor Molecules III: A Benchmark of GW Methods, J. Chem. Theory Comput.12, 615 (2016)

    work page 2016

  69. [69]

    A. M. Lewis and T. C. Berkelbach, Vertex Corrections to the Polarizability Do Not Improve the GW Approx- imation for the Ionization Potential of Molecules, J. Chem. Theory Comput.15, 2925 (2019)

    work page 2019

  70. [70]

    Vlˇ cek, Stochastic Vertex Corrections: Linear Scaling Methods for Accurate Quasiparticle Energies, J

    V. Vlˇ cek, Stochastic Vertex Corrections: Linear Scaling Methods for Accurate Quasiparticle Energies, J. Chem. Theory Comput.15, 6254 (2019)

    work page 2019

  71. [71]

    Y. Wang, P. Rinke, and X. Ren, Assessing the G0W0Γ0(1) Approach: Beyond G0W0 with Hedin’s Full Second-Order Self-Energy Contribution, J. Chem. Theory Comput.17, 5140 (2021). 18

    work page 2021

  72. [72]

    Mejuto-Zaera, G

    C. Mejuto-Zaera, G. Weng, M. Romanova, S. J. Cot- ton, K. B. Whaley, N. M. Tubman, and V. Vlˇ cek, Are multi-quasiparticle interactions important in molecular ionization?, J. Chem. Phys.154, 121101 (2021)

    work page 2021

  73. [73]

    Bruneval, Ionization energy of atoms obtained from GW self-energy or from random phase approximation total energies, J

    F. Bruneval, Ionization energy of atoms obtained from GW self-energy or from random phase approximation total energies, J. Chem. Phys.136, 194107 (2012)

    work page 2012

  74. [74]

    Caruso, M

    F. Caruso, M. Dauth, M. J. van Setten, and P. Rinke, Benchmark of GW Approaches for the GW100 Test Set, J. Chem. Theory Comput.12, 5076 (2016)

    work page 2016

  75. [75]

    Rangel, S

    T. Rangel, S. M. Hamed, F. Bruneval, and J. B. Neaton, Evaluating the GW Approximation with CCSD(T) for Charged Excitations Across the Oligoacenes, J. Chem. Theory Comput.12, 2834 (2016)

    work page 2016

  76. [76]

    Kaplan, M

    F. Kaplan, M. E. Harding, C. Seiler, F. Weigend, F. Ev- ers, and M. J. van Setten, Quasi-Particle Self-Consistent GWfor Molecules, J. Chem. Theory Comput.12, 2528 (2016)

    work page 2016

  77. [77]

    Rohfling and Louie [52] have emphasized that δW δG is extremely chal- lenging to evaluate

    Note: However, there is no clear physical justification for dropping the term containing δW δG . Rohfling and Louie [52] have emphasized that δW δG is extremely chal- lenging to evaluate

    work page

  78. [78]

    B. I. Dunlap, Robust and variational fitting, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.2, 2113 (2000)

    work page 2000

  79. [79]

    Werner, F

    H.-J. Werner, F. R. Manby, and P. J. Knowles, Fast linear scaling second-order Møller-Plesset perturbation theory (MP2) using local and density fitting approxi- mations, J. Chem. Phys.118, 8149 (2003)

    work page 2003

  80. [80]

    X. Ren, P. Rinke, V. Blum, J. Wieferink, A. Tkatchenko, A. Sanfilippo, K. Reuter, and M. Schef- fler, Resolution-of-identity approach to Hartree–Fock, hybrid density functionals, RPA, MP2 and GW with numeric atom-centered orbital basis functions, New J. Phys.14, 053020 (2012)

    work page 2012

Showing first 80 references.