Manderna Ruby, Vu Nam, Foley Jonathan J
Department of Chemistry, University of North Carolina Charlotte, 9201 University City Bldv, Charlotte, North Carolina 07470A, USA.
J Chem Phys. 2024 Nov 7;161(17). doi: 10.1063/5.0230565.
Molecules under strong or ultra-strong light-matter coupling present an intriguing route to modify chemical structure, properties, and reactivity. A rigorous theoretical treatment of such systems requires handling matter and photon degrees of freedom on an equal quantum mechanical footing. In the regime of molecular electronic strong or ultra-strong coupling to one or a few molecules, it is desirable to treat the molecular electronic degrees of freedom using the tools of ab initio quantum chemistry, yielding an approach referred to as ab initio cavity quantum electrodynamics (ai-QED), where the photon degrees of freedom are treated at the level of cavity QED. We analyze two complementary approaches to ai-QED: (1) a parameterized ai-QED, a two-step approach where the matter degrees of freedom are computed using existing electronic structure theories, enabling the construction of rigorous ai-QED Hamiltonians in a basis of many-electron eigenstates, and (2) self-consistent ai-QED, a one-step approach where electronic structure methods are generalized to include coupling between electronic and photon degrees of freedom. Although these approaches are equivalent in their exact limits, we identify a disparity between the projection of the two-body dipole self-energy operator that appears in the parameterized approach and its exact counterpart in the self-consistent approach. We provide a theoretical argument that this disparity resolves only under the limit of a complete orbital basis and a complete many-electron basis for the projection. We present numerical results highlighting this disparity and its resolution in a particularly simple molecular system of helium hydride cation, where it is possible to approach these two complete basis limits simultaneously. In this same helium hydride system, we examine and compare the practical issue of the computational cost required to converge each approach toward the complete orbital and many-electron bases limit. Finally, we assess the aspect of photonic convergence for polar and charged species, finding comparable behavior between parameterized and self-consistent approaches.
处于强或超强光与物质耦合状态的分子为改变化学结构、性质和反应活性提供了一条引人入胜的途径。对这类系统进行严格的理论处理需要在平等的量子力学基础上处理物质和光子的自由度。在分子电子与一个或几个分子发生强或超强耦合的 regime 中,期望使用从头算量子化学工具来处理分子电子自由度,从而产生一种称为从头算腔量子电动力学(ai-QED)的方法,其中光子自由度在腔量子电动力学层面进行处理。我们分析了 ai-QED 的两种互补方法:(1)参数化 ai-QED,这是一种两步法,其中物质自由度使用现有的电子结构理论进行计算,从而能够在多电子本征态的基础上构建严格的 ai-QED 哈密顿量;(2)自洽 ai-QED,这是一种一步法,其中电子结构方法被推广以包括电子和光子自由度之间的耦合。尽管这些方法在其精确极限下是等效的,但我们发现参数化方法中出现的两体偶极自能算符的投影与其在自洽方法中的精确对应物之间存在差异。我们提供了一个理论论据,表明这种差异仅在投影的完整轨道基和完整多电子基的极限下才会消除。我们给出了数值结果,突出了这种差异及其在氢化氦阳离子这个特别简单的分子系统中的解决情况,在该系统中可以同时接近这两个完整基的极限。在同一个氢化氦系统中,我们研究并比较了使每种方法收敛到完整轨道基和多电子基极限所需的计算成本这一实际问题。最后,我们评估了极性和带电物种的光子收敛方面,发现参数化方法和自洽方法之间具有可比的行为。