arxiv: 2511.06506 · v1 · submitted 2025-11-09 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el · cond-mat.supr-con· physics.comp-ph· quant-ph

Resonating valence bond pairing energy in graphene by quantum Monte Carlo

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

Pith reviewed 2026-05-17 23:18 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.supr-conphysics.comp-phquant-ph

keywords resonating valence bondgraphenequantum Monte Carlodiffusion Monte Carloelectron pairingenergy gapnanostructurespairing energy

0 comments

The pith

A finite gap near the Fermi level stabilizes resonating valence bond pairing in graphene with a binding energy of 0.48 millihartree per atom.

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

The paper applies diffusion quantum Monte Carlo to rectangular graphene samples using Jastrow-Slater and Jastrow-antisymmetrized-geminal-power wave functions to compute the energy gain from resonating valence bond pairing. Calculations show that pairing is absent when the single-particle gap closes at lengths satisfying Lx equal to three times an integer times sqrt(3) times the carbon-carbon distance, but becomes stable once a finite gap opens for other sizes. The extrapolated pairing energy in the thermodynamic limit reaches roughly 0.48 millihartree per atom for the gapped case. A reader would care because the result ties electron pairing directly to sample geometry rather than doping or external fields, offering a route to correlated states in confined carbon nanostructures.

Core claim

Variational and diffusion quantum Monte Carlo calculations demonstrate that the resonating valence bond state carries no binding energy in the zero-gap limit of rectangular graphene but acquires a finite pairing energy of approximately 0.48(1) millihartree per atom once a size-induced gap appears near the Fermi level, with the gap vanishing only when the x-length satisfies Lx = 3n sqrt(3) d.

What carries the argument

The geometry-dependent single-particle gap near the Fermi level that appears in rectangular samples lacking pi/3 rotational symmetry, which controls whether diffusion Monte Carlo finds a stable resonating valence bond paired state.

If this is right

No stable resonating valence bond pairing occurs in gapless graphene under the conditions studied.
A finite gap near the Fermi level produces a pairing energy of 0.48 millihartree per atom that survives extrapolation to the thermodynamic limit.
The pairing is driven by the opening of a gap through choice of rectangular dimensions rather than by intrinsic interaction strength alone.
The result applies specifically to confined graphene nanostructures whose boundaries break the usual rotational symmetry.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

If the gap-stabilized pairing survives in other geometries, then deliberately patterning graphene ribbons or flakes to open a gap could induce similar pairing without doping.
The same size-dependent gap mechanism may appear in related two-dimensional carbon systems such as graphene nanoribbons or bilayer structures under confinement.
Testing whether the pairing energy remains finite when the gap is opened by strain or substrates rather than by finite-size effects would extend the result beyond the rectangular samples examined here.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen Jastrow-Slater-determinant and Jastrow-antisymmetrized-geminal-power wave functions must capture the essential correlations of the true resonating valence bond state, and finite-size scaling from rectangular samples must reach the thermodynamic limit without dominant boundary-condition biases.

What would settle it

A calculation or measurement on successively larger rectangular samples that finds the extrapolated pairing energy approaching zero even in the finite-gap configurations would falsify the claim of stable gap-stabilized pairing.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.06506 by A. Principi, M.S. Bahramy, S. Azadi, T.D. K\"uhne.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. VMC energy as a function of the number of optimiza [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. (a) VMC and DMC energies for finite gap (Ins) and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. Single particle energy band as a function of momen [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

We determine the resonating-valence-bond (RVB) state in graphene using real-space quantum Monte Carlo with correlated variational wave functions. Variational and diffusion quantum Monte Carlo (DMC) calculations with Jastrow-Slater-determinant and Jastrow-antisymmetrized-geminal-power ansatze are employed to evaluate the RVB pairing energy. Using a rectangular graphene sample that lacks $\pi/3$ rotational symmetry, we found that the single-particle energy gap near the Fermi level depends on the system size along the $x$-direction. The gap vanishes when the length satisfies $L_x=3n\sqrt{3}d$, where $n$ is an integer and $d$ is the carbon-carbon bond length, otherwise, the system, exhibits a finite gap. Our DMC results show no stable RVB pairing in the zero-gap case, whereas the opening of a finite gap near the Fermi level stabilizes the electron pairing. The DMC predicted absolute value of pairing energy at the thermodynamic limit for a finite-gap system is $\sim 0.48(1)$ mHa/atom. Our results reveal a feometry-driven electron pairing mechanism in the confined graphene nanostructure.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

DMC reports a finite RVB pairing energy of ~0.48 mHa/atom in gapped rectangular graphene but the extrapolation to thermodynamic limit conflicts with the stated gap closure.

read the letter

The main thing to know is that this paper uses diffusion Monte Carlo on rectangular graphene flakes to compute an RVB pairing energy that is zero when the single-particle gap closes at Lx = 3n sqrt(3) d and nonzero otherwise, with an extrapolated value of 0.48(1) mHa per atom for the gapped sequence. They compare Jastrow-Slater and Jastrow-antisymmetrized-geminal-power wave functions and tie the result to the geometry-induced gap near the Fermi level. The concrete number and the clear distinction between the two size families are the actual new pieces; prior RVB work on graphene has not, to my knowledge, reported this specific size-tuned pairing energy from real-space QMC. The calculations supply statistical error bars and a direct link between gap presence and pairing stability, which is useful for anyone modeling confined carbon systems. The approach is straightforward and the rectangular geometry is a reasonable way to break the usual symmetry and control the gap. The soft spot is the thermodynamic extrapolation itself. Even along the gapped sizes the gap magnitude must fall with increasing Lx, roughly as 1/L for Dirac fermions. If pairing is strictly stabilized by a finite gap, the energy should also trend to zero, yet the paper quotes a nonzero limit. This either means the boundary conditions leave a residual gap that does not vanish or the AGP ansatz introduces a bias that favors pairing only when a gap is artificially present. The stress-test note captures this tension accurately from the abstract. Without the full size-scaling plots, convergence data, or raw energies it is difficult to judge how well the extrapolation is controlled. The variational parameters are optimized in the usual way, which is fine but adds another layer that needs checking. This work is mainly for people running QMC on 2D materials or studying RVB states in nanostructures; a reader already familiar with graphene QMC would get the most out of the size-dependent gap observation. It is coherent enough on its own terms to deserve a serious referee who can examine the finite-size analysis and the robustness of the pairing energy under different boundaries.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses variational and diffusion Monte Carlo (DMC) with Jastrow-Slater-determinant and Jastrow-antisymmetrized-geminal-power ansatze to compute the resonating-valence-bond (RVB) pairing energy in rectangular graphene samples. It reports that the single-particle gap near the Fermi level vanishes for L_x = 3n√3 d but is finite otherwise; DMC finds zero pairing energy in the zero-gap cases but a finite extrapolated value of ~0.48(1) mHa/atom in the thermodynamic limit for the gapped sequence, interpreted as evidence for a geometry-driven pairing mechanism.

Significance. If the central numerical results hold after addressing finite-size consistency, the work supplies a concrete DMC benchmark for gap-stabilized RVB pairing in graphene nanostructures, including explicit statistical error bars and a size-dependent gap condition that is independent of the final energy value. The dual use of JSD and JAGP wave functions and the focus on rectangular geometries without π/3 symmetry constitute clear methodological strengths.

major comments (2)

[Abstract and §4] Abstract and §4 (Results): the extrapolation of pairing energy to the thermodynamic limit for the finite-gap sequence yields a non-zero value (~0.48(1) mHa/atom), yet the manuscript states that the gap magnitude depends on L_x and vanishes for specific sizes; because the gapped sequence has gap ~1/L_x (or faster) that closes in the L_x → ∞ limit, the extrapolated pairing energy should approach the zero value reported for the gapless sequence unless an additional mechanism keeps an effective gap open under the chosen boundary conditions.
[§3 and §5] §3 (Methods) and §5 (Discussion): the claim that the Jastrow-AGP ansatz captures the true RVB state sufficiently to demonstrate gap stabilization rests on the variational parameters and rectangular geometry; however, the geminal structure of the AGP may preferentially stabilize pairing precisely when a single-particle gap is artificially imposed by the boundary conditions, and no explicit test (e.g., comparison of gap closure rate versus pairing energy across multiple L_x in the gapped family) is provided to rule out this bias.

minor comments (2)

[Figure 2] Figure 2 caption: the labeling of zero-gap versus finite-gap data points should explicitly reference the L_x = 3n√3 d condition to aid readability.
The manuscript would benefit from a brief comparison to prior variational Monte Carlo studies of RVB states in graphene (e.g., those using different boundary conditions) to contextualize the reported pairing energy scale.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below, indicating where revisions will be made to improve clarity and address the concerns raised.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract and §4] Abstract and §4 (Results): the extrapolation of pairing energy to the thermodynamic limit for the finite-gap sequence yields a non-zero value (~0.48(1) mHa/atom), yet the manuscript states that the gap magnitude depends on L_x and vanishes for specific sizes; because the gapped sequence has gap ~1/L_x (or faster) that closes in the L_x → ∞ limit, the extrapolated pairing energy should approach the zero value reported for the gapless sequence unless an additional mechanism keeps an effective gap open under the chosen boundary conditions.

Authors: We agree that the single-particle gap for the gapped sequence scales to zero in the L_x → ∞ limit, as stated in the manuscript. Our extrapolation of the pairing energy is performed separately on the sequence of finite-size systems that exhibit a non-zero gap due to the rectangular boundary conditions. The resulting non-zero value of 0.48(1) mHa/atom reflects the pairing energy associated with this geometry-driven gap stabilization at finite sizes. In the true thermodynamic limit under periodic boundary conditions the gap vanishes and pairing is absent, consistent with the zero result for the gapless sequence. We do not invoke an additional mechanism to keep a gap open at infinite size. We have revised §4 to explicitly discuss the gap closure rate, the separate extrapolations for each sequence, and the physical interpretation of the finite extrapolated value as a benchmark for gap-stabilized RVB pairing. revision: yes
Referee: [§3 and §5] §3 (Methods) and §5 (Discussion): the claim that the Jastrow-AGP ansatz captures the true RVB state sufficiently to demonstrate gap stabilization rests on the variational parameters and rectangular geometry; however, the geminal structure of the AGP may preferentially stabilize pairing precisely when a single-particle gap is artificially imposed by the boundary conditions, and no explicit test (e.g., comparison of gap closure rate versus pairing energy across multiple L_x in the gapped family) is provided to rule out this bias.

Authors: The referee correctly identifies a potential source of bias in the AGP ansatz. We have therefore performed calculations with both the Jastrow-Slater-determinant and Jastrow-antisymmetrized-geminal-power wave functions. The DMC results are consistent between the two ansatze, with pairing energy vanishing in the gapless sequence and remaining finite in the gapped sequence. This agreement indicates that the stabilization is driven by the presence of the gap rather than by a specific feature of the geminal structure. The rectangular geometry without π/3 symmetry was deliberately chosen to allow the gap to be tuned by system size. While we did not originally include a direct comparison of gap magnitude versus pairing energy across the gapped family, we will add this analysis together with the relevant variational parameters in the revised §5 to further rule out ansatz bias. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; pairing energy from explicit DMC projection

full rationale

The derivation computes RVB pairing energy via variational and diffusion Monte Carlo on Jastrow-Slater and Jastrow-AGP wave functions for rectangular graphene supercells whose single-particle gap is determined by geometry (Lx = 3n√3 d). Zero-gap sizes yield zero pairing energy while gapped sizes yield finite values; the thermodynamic-limit value is obtained by extrapolation of these independent numerical results. No step defines the output energy in terms of itself, renames a fitted parameter as a prediction, or relies on a self-citation chain that is itself unverified. The ansatz and boundary conditions are chosen independently of the final energy number, satisfying the criteria for a self-contained computation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the accuracy of the chosen variational wave functions for the RVB state and on the assumption that the observed gap behavior is dominated by the imposed rectangular boundary conditions rather than other finite-size or correlation effects.

free parameters (1)

Jastrow and geminal variational parameters
Optimized during variational Monte Carlo to lower the energy before diffusion projection.

axioms (1)

domain assumption The RVB state is adequately represented by Jastrow-Slater-determinant and Jastrow-antisymmetrized-geminal-power forms
Invoked by the choice of ansatze in the variational and diffusion steps.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5533 in / 1393 out tokens · 40608 ms · 2026-05-17T23:18:01.660788+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

DMC predicted absolute value of pairing energy at the thermodynamic limit for a finite-gap system is ∼0.48(1) mHa/atom... gap vanishes when L_x = 3n√3 d
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/AlphaCoordinateFixation.lean J_uniquely_calibrated_via_higher_derivative unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

Jastrow-antisymmetrized-geminal-power ansatz... pairing energy δ_P

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

An arXiv:2511.06506v1 [cond-mat.str-el] 9 Nov 2025 2 FIG. 1. A spin-singlet dimer configuration (blue color) on graphene lattice. The resonating valence bond (RVB) state is composed of a superposition of such configurations. Threesp 2 orbitals form theσband containing three localized electrons, while the bonding among thep z orbitals of different lattice ...

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[2]

Novoselov, A

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

work page 2004
[3]

Geim and K

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

work page 2007
[4]

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

work page 2009
[5]

Novoselov, A

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

work page 2005
[6]

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

work page 2012
[7]

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

work page 2011
[8]

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

work page 2018
[9]

Azadi, N

S. Azadi, N. Drummond, and S. Vinko, Quantum monte carlo study of the phase diagram of the two-dimensional 6 uniform electron liquid, Phys. Rev. B110, 245145 (2024)

work page 2024
[10]

Azadi, N

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

work page 2025
[11]

Novoselov, V

K. Novoselov, V. Falko, L. Colombo, P. Gellert, M. Schwab, and K. Kim, A roadmap for graphene, Na- ture490, 192 (2012)

work page 2012
[12]

Guinea, M

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

work page 2010
[13]

Novoselov, Z

K. Novoselov, Z. Jiang, Y. Zhang, S. Morozov, H. Stormer, U. Zeitler, J. Maan, G. Boebinger, P. Kim, and A. Geim, Room-temperature quantum hall effect in graphene, Science3151379(2007)

work page 2007
[14]

Drut and T

J. Drut and T. L¨ ahde, Is graphene in vacuum an insula- tor?, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 026802 (2009)

work page 2009
[15]

Rotenberg, A

E. Rotenberg, A. Bostwick, T. Ohta, J. L. McChesney, T. Seyller, and K. Horn, Origin of the energy bandgap in epitaxial graphene, Nat. Materials7, 258 (2008)

work page 2008
[16]

Sorella and E

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

work page 1992
[17]

Sachdev,Low Dimensional Quantum Field Theories for Condensed Matter Physicists, edited by L

S. Sachdev,Low Dimensional Quantum Field Theories for Condensed Matter Physicists, edited by L. Yu, S. Lundqvist, and G. Morandi(World Scientific, Singapore, 1995)

work page 1995
[18]

Z. Meng, T. Lang, S. Wessel, F. Assaad, and A. Mura- matsu, Quantum spin liquid emerging in two-dimensional correlated dirac fermions, Nature464, 847 (2010)

work page 2010
[19]

Tran and K.-S

M.-T. Tran and K.-S. Kim, Spin liquids in graphene, Phys. Rev. B83, 2011 (2011)

work page 2011
[20]

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

work page 1987
[21]

Baskaran and P

G. Baskaran and P. W. Anderson, Gauge theory of high-temperature superconductors and strongly corre- lated fermi systems, Phys. Rev. B37, 580 (1988)

work page 1988
[22]

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

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

work page 1960
[23]

Glittum, A

C. Glittum, A. ˇStrkalj, D. Prabhakaran, P. Goddard, C. D. Batista, and C. Castelnovo, A resonant valence bond spin liquid in the dilute limit of doped frustrated mott insulators, Nat. Phys.21, 1211 (2024)

work page 2024
[24]

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

work page 1987
[25]

Y. Zhou, K. Kanoda, and T.-K. Ng, Quantum spin liquid states, Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 025003 (2017)

work page 2017
[26]

Pathak and V

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

work page 2010
[27]

Shimizu, K

Y. Shimizu, K. Miyagawa, K. Kanoda, M. Maesato, and G. Saito, Spin liquid state in an organic mott insulator with a triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett.91, 107001 (2003)

work page 2003
[28]

M. R. Norman, Colloquium: Herbertsmithite and the search for the quantum spin liquid, Rev. Mod. Phys.88, 041002 (2016)

work page 2016
[29]

Casula and S

M. Casula and S. Sorella, Improper s-wave symmetry of the electronic pairing in iron-based superconductors by first-principles calculations, Phys. Rev. B88, 155125 (2013)

work page 2013
[30]

Becca and S

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

work page 2017
[31]

Sorella, N

S. Sorella, N. Devaux, M. Dagrada, G. Mazzola, and M. Casula, Geminal embedding scheme for optimal atomic basis set construction in correlated calculations, J. Chem. Phys.143, 244112 (2015)

work page 2015
[32]

Marchi, S

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

work page 2009
[33]

Marchi, S

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

work page 2011
[34]

Azadi, R

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

work page 2015
[35]

Casula and S

M. Casula and S. Sorella, Geminal wave functions with jastrow correlation: A first application to atoms, J. Chem. Phys.119, 6500 (2003)

work page 2003
[36]

Casula, C

M. Casula, C. Attaccalite, and S. Sorella, Correlated geminal wave function for molecules: An efficient res- onating valence bond approach, J. Chem. Phys.121, 7110 (2004)

work page 2004
[37]

Annaberdiyev, G

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

work page 2018
[38]

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

work page 2017
[39]

Azadi, C

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

work page 2010
[40]

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

work page 1981
[41]

S. Fahy, X. W. Wang, and S. G. Louie, Variational quantum monte carlo nonlocal pseudopotential approach to solids: Formulation and application to diamond, graphite, and silicon, Phys. Rev. B42, 3503 (1990)

work page 1990
[42]

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

work page 2007
[43]

Sorella, Green function monte carlo with stochastic reconfiguration, Phys

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

work page 1998
[44]

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

work page 2001
[45]

D. M. Ceperley, Ground state of the fermion one- component plasma: A monte carlo study in two and three dimensions, Phys. Rev. B18, 3126 (1978)

work page 1978
[46]

D. M. Ceperley and B. J. Alder, Ground state of the electron gas by a stochastic method, Phys. Rev. Lett. 45, 566 (1980)

work page 1980
[47]

Melton and L

C. Melton and L. Mitas, Quantum monte carlo with vari- able spins: Fixed-phase and fixed-node approximations, Phys. Rev. E96, 043305 (2017)

work page 2017
[48]

Azadi, M

S. Azadi, M. Bahramy, and T. K¨ uhne, Electron correla- 7 tion effects and spin-liquid state in the herbertsmithite kagome lattice, Phys. Rev. Res.7, 013165 (2025)

work page 2025
[49]

Nakano, C

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

work page 2020
[50]

See Supplemental Material for more details of our calcu- lations and additional figures and data

work page
[51]

Black-Schaffer and S

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

work page 2007
[52]

Mitas, Quantum monte carlo pair orbital wave func- tions for periodic systems, Phys

L. Mitas, Quantum monte carlo pair orbital wave func- tions for periodic systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 126401 (2025)

work page 2025