howto:rtp_field_xas
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revisionLast revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
howto:rtp_field_xas [2023/10/10 14:07] – glebreton | howto:rtp_field_xas [2023/10/16 16:15] – oschuett | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
In this tutorial, we will present a simulation of resonant X-Ray excitation of an isolated carbon monoxide in real-time using a time-dependent field. | In this tutorial, we will present a simulation of resonant X-Ray excitation of an isolated carbon monoxide in real-time using a time-dependent field. | ||
On this page, you will find an overview of the method, some equations, and the CP2K input file. | On this page, you will find an overview of the method, some equations, and the CP2K input file. | ||
- | A longer version is available in the form of a jupyter notebook file in {{: | + | A longer version is available in the form of a jupyter notebook file in {{ : |
This kind of calculation is not easy to grasp: do not hesitate to have a first look before diving into the equations and details! | This kind of calculation is not easy to grasp: do not hesitate to have a first look before diving into the equations and details! | ||
This tutorial is connected to this article REF where you can find complementary information. | This tutorial is connected to this article REF where you can find complementary information. | ||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
==== Real-Time TDDFT for resonant excitation ==== | ==== Real-Time TDDFT for resonant excitation ==== | ||
- | Such calculation aims to promote a small number of electrons from one specific state to another using an electromagnetic field at a given resonant | + | Such real-time |
== Real-Time TDDFT reminders == | == Real-Time TDDFT reminders == | ||
The light is treated classically using either the length or velocity gauge to interact with the electrons. | The light is treated classically using either the length or velocity gauge to interact with the electrons. | ||
- | The simulation starts usually from the electronic ground state, but one can also construct another starting state in CP2K to start with. | + | The simulation starts usually from the electronic ground state, but one can also construct another starting state in CP2K. |
The field is applied as the wave function is propagated in real-time. | The field is applied as the wave function is propagated in real-time. | ||
This time-dependent field $\textbf{F}(t)$ has typically an envelope, $E_{\text{env}}$, | This time-dependent field $\textbf{F}(t)$ has typically an envelope, $E_{\text{env}}$, | ||
Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
For X-Rays, we use the XAS_TDP scheme implemented in CP2K, see for instance [[howto: | For X-Rays, we use the XAS_TDP scheme implemented in CP2K, see for instance [[howto: | ||
- | For isolated carbon monoxide and with our calculation parameters (PBEh functional and PCSEG2 basis set), the first available for the Oxygen 1s excitation | + | For isolated carbon monoxide and with our calculation parameters (PBEh functional and PCSEG2 basis set), the first available |
- | This means that applying an electric field with a carrying frequency of 529~ev should promote electrons from the oxygen 1s toward this excited state noted $|\omega> | + | Hence, |
- | Within the RT-TDDFT approach, it means that the Molecular Orbital corresponding to the Oxygen 1s $|1s(t)> | + | Within the RT-TDDFT approach, it means that the Molecular Orbital corresponding to the Oxygen 1s, $|1s(t)> |
$$ | $$ | ||
Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
Note that this equation leaves aside the time-dependent phase factor between these two states. | Note that this equation leaves aside the time-dependent phase factor between these two states. | ||
- | If the field is resonant with only one state and if we assume that the rest of the electrons do not evolve we can use the generalized version of the Rabi oscillation formula to get a prediction of the excited state population with time: | + | If the field is resonant with only one electronic transition |
$$ | $$ | ||
Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
$$ | $$ | ||
- | Where $\mathbf{\mu}^{res}$ is the transition dipole moment between the ground and excited state, $\mathbf{F}$ the polarization of the field, and $A(t)$ the integral of the field envelope. | + | Where $\mathbf{\mu}^{res}$ is the transition dipole moment between the ground and excited state, $\mathbf{F}$ |
In today' | In today' | ||
Line 73: | Line 73: | ||
$$ | $$ | ||
- | Where $\tau = |\mathbf{\mu}^{res} \cdot \mathbf{F}|^2 $ can be seen as an instantaneous promoting rate of the electrons | + | Where $\tau = |\mathbf{\mu}^{res} \cdot \mathbf{F}|^2 $ can be seen as an instantaneous promoting rate for the core electron |
== Real-Time evolution expectations == | == Real-Time evolution expectations == | ||
In the perturbative regime, one can expect the above-mentioned excited population prediction to be correct as the oscillator strength is provided by Linear Response. | In the perturbative regime, one can expect the above-mentioned excited population prediction to be correct as the oscillator strength is provided by Linear Response. | ||
- | Thus, one can track in real-time | + | Thus, one can track in real-time |
$$ | $$ | ||
Line 85: | Line 84: | ||
$$ | $$ | ||
- | And we should also have that: $\rho_{Exc}(t) = 1 - \rho_{GS}(t)$. | + | Moreover, |
These projections are written for the Molecular Orbital originally corresponding to the Oxygen 1s, but we can also write them for the other electrons. | These projections are written for the Molecular Orbital originally corresponding to the Oxygen 1s, but we can also write them for the other electrons. | ||
Yet, in the case of core X-Ray excitation, we do not expect the other electrons to be affected within the perturbative regime: for any Molecular Orbital $i$ which is not the one corresponding to the Oxygen 1s we should have: | Yet, in the case of core X-Ray excitation, we do not expect the other electrons to be affected within the perturbative regime: for any Molecular Orbital $i$ which is not the one corresponding to the Oxygen 1s we should have: | ||
$$ | $$ | ||
- | |\psi_i(t)> | + | |\psi_i(t)> |
$$ | $$ | ||
- | with $E_i$ the energy associated to the $i^[\text{th}} | + | with $E_i$ the energy associated to the $i^[\text{th}} |
- | Let us define the projection for all the Molecular | + | Let us define the projection for all the molecular |
$$ | $$ | ||
Line 100: | Line 99: | ||
$$ | $$ | ||
- | For all MO except the one corresponding to the Oxygen 1s we should have $\rho^i_{GS}(t) = 1$ and $\rho^i_{Exc}(t) \approx 0$. Therefore, here is the generalized formula for the ground state population and the excited state one for the whole wave-function: | + | For all MOs except the ones corresponding to the Oxygen 1s we should have $\rho^i_{GS}(t) = 1$ and $\rho^i_{Exc}(t) \approx 0$. Therefore, here is the generalized formula for the ground state population and the excited state one for the whole wave-function: |
$$ | $$ | ||
Line 106: | Line 105: | ||
$$ | $$ | ||
- | We should have in the perturbative regime $\rho_{GS}(t)$ close to the number of electron $N_e$ and $\rho_{GS}(t) = N_e - \rho_{Exc}(t)$. | + | We should have in the perturbative regime $\rho_{GS}(t)$ close to the number of electron $N_e$: |
Finally, if we neglect the off-resonance interaction with the field, the evolution of the energy is: | Finally, if we neglect the off-resonance interaction with the field, the evolution of the energy is: | ||
Line 222: | Line 221: | ||
&END POISSON | &END POISSON | ||
&XC | &XC | ||
- | & | + | |
- | & | + | & |
- | | + | SCALE_X 0.55 |
- | &END | + | &END |
- | | + | &END XC_FUNCTIONAL |
- | | + | &HF |
- | FRACTION 0.45 | + | FRACTION 0.45 |
- | & | + | & |
- | | + | POTENTIAL_TYPE TRUNCATED |
- | | + | CUTOFF_RADIUS 7.0 |
- | &END INTERACTION_POTENTIAL | + | &END INTERACTION_POTENTIAL |
- | | + | &END HF |
- | | + | &END XC |
& | & | ||
Line 274: | Line 273: | ||
</ | </ | ||
- | We will not detail all the parameters and instead focus on the one related to the dynamics itself, the field, and the time-dependent projection part. | + | We will not detail all the parameters and instead focus on the one related to the real-time propagation, the field, and the time-dependent projection part. |
== Real-Time Propagation parameters == | == Real-Time Propagation parameters == | ||
Line 282: | Line 281: | ||
INITIAL_WFN SCF_WFN | INITIAL_WFN SCF_WFN | ||
</ | </ | ||
- | Therefore, before | + | Before |
We use a Molecular Orbital-based description of the wave function for the propagation along with the Arnoldi approach to compute the exponential: | We use a Molecular Orbital-based description of the wave function for the propagation along with the Arnoldi approach to compute the exponential: | ||
Line 289: | Line 288: | ||
</ | </ | ||
- | Note that for very large systems, the density-based method can be used for linear scaling (see the DENSITY_PROPAGATION keyword). | + | Note that for extensive |
For each time step, the AERTS algorithm is used with a convergence threshold defined by | For each time step, the AERTS algorithm is used with a convergence threshold defined by | ||
Line 302: | Line 301: | ||
</ | </ | ||
- | The time step used is rather small since we have to describe a core-hole excitation process that takes place with a typical frequency of 529~ev. As a rule of thumb, the time step should be about tens of the field frequency used: | + | The time step used is rather small since we have to describe a core-hole excitation process that takes place with a typical frequency of 529 ev. As a rule of thumb, the time step should be about tens of the field frequency used: |
< | < | ||
Line 314: | Line 313: | ||
The time-dependent electric field is defined for both gauges in the EFIELD section. It should be noted that one can define several EFIELD sections to apply several fields within the same simulation. | The time-dependent electric field is defined for both gauges in the EFIELD section. It should be noted that one can define several EFIELD sections to apply several fields within the same simulation. | ||
- | The field is defined by its envelope, its intensity | + | The field is defined by its envelope, its intensity, its polarization along the laboratory x, y, and z-axis, its wavelength, and the original phase. Several types of field envelopes can be used. Here we use a Gaussian one with a width of $\sigma=0.3073$ fs and centered at $T0=1.3190$ fs. The intensity used is 4.08E+13 W.cm$^{-2}$. Along with a carrying frequency of 529 ev (approximately 2.34374655955 nm), it should promote about $10^{-3}$ from the Oxygen 1s to the first available excited state. See {{: |
< | < | ||
Line 356: | Line 355: | ||
All the time-dependent Molecular Orbitals are projected (TD_MO_INDEX = -1) and these projections are stored separately (SUM_ON_ALL_TD .FALSE.). This calculation is spin-independent so one does not have to define the spin of the MO to project. | All the time-dependent Molecular Orbitals are projected (TD_MO_INDEX = -1) and these projections are stored separately (SUM_ON_ALL_TD .FALSE.). This calculation is spin-independent so one does not have to define the spin of the MO to project. | ||
- | The reference to projected | + | The reference to projected |
- | There are $N_e/2 = 7$ molecular orbitals for carbon monoxide. There are thus 7 time dependent MOs (the $i$) and 7 reference MO (the $j$), so that there will be $7x7=49$ projection per time step: | + | There are $N_e/2 = 7$ molecular orbitals for carbon monoxide. There are thus 7 time-dependent MOs (the $i$s) and 7 reference MO (the $j$s), so that there will be $7x7=49$ projection per time step: |
$$ | $$ | ||
Line 371: | Line 370: | ||
$$ | $$ | ||
- | Now, let us focus on the second and third projections which can be viewed as excited-state projections: | + | Now, let us focus on the second and third projections which can be viewed as projections toward |
< | < | ||
Line 387: | Line 386: | ||
</ | </ | ||
- | In this case, all the time-dependent MO are involved in the projection and stored separately. This time, the reference wave function is supposed to be from an XAS_TDP calculation, | + | In this case, all the time-dependent MO are involved in the projection and stored separately. This time, the reference wave function is supposed to be from an XAS_TDP calculation, |
$$ | $$ | ||
Line 394: | Line 393: | ||
Where $c_\omega^a$ is the $a^{\text{th}}$ atomic coefficient of the excited state found in the XAS_TDP module. | Where $c_\omega^a$ is the $a^{\text{th}}$ atomic coefficient of the excited state found in the XAS_TDP module. | ||
- | There will thus be 7 projections per time step in this case. The excited state population associated | + | There will be 7 projections per time step in this case: one for each time-dependent MO. The excited state population associated |
$$ | $$ | ||
Line 400: | Line 399: | ||
$$ | $$ | ||
- | The carbon monoxide molecule has a rotational symmetry along its CO bond: if one notes this axis $z$, then the $x$ and $y$-axis are equivalent by symmetry. It happens that the first available excited state for the Oxygen 1s is degenerate: there are two available states orthogonal in the $xy$-plane. | + | The carbon monoxide molecule has a rotational symmetry along its CO bond. If one notes this axis $z$, then the $x$ and $y$-axis are equivalent by symmetry. It happens that the first available excited state for the Oxygen 1s is degenerate: there are two available |
- | Therefore, the excited state should be understood as the some over these two frequency | + | Therefore, the excited state should be understood as the sum over the two equivalent |
$$ | $$ | ||
Line 408: | Line 407: | ||
$$ | $$ | ||
- | Where $\omega' | + | Where $\omega' |
howto/rtp_field_xas.txt · Last modified: 2024/02/24 10:02 by oschuett