Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 55 references

Auxiliary dynamical mean-field approach for Anderson-Hubbard model with off-diagonal disorder

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that off-diagonal hopping disorder cannot be treated as a small correction: combined with dynamical mean-field theory, it shifts the Mott metal-insulator boundary and produces a reentrant insulator-metal-insulator…

desk verdict A credible but under-validated extension of ACPA to electronic systems; the U>0 results need a benchmark before I'd trust the reentrant phase diagram. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.07353 v1 pith:IBFX43NE submitted 2025-02-11 cond-mat.str-el physics.comp-phquant-ph

Zelei Zhang , Jiawei Yan , Li Huang , Youqi Ke This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-elphysics.comp-phquant-ph
keywords Anderson-Hubbardmodeloff-diagonaldisordercoherentpotentialapproximationdynamicalmean-fieldtheorymetal-insulatortransitionreentrantbehaviorauxiliarycouplingspacesimplecubiclattice
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

The paper extends the auxiliary coherent potential approximation (ACPA) to electronic systems and couples it with dynamical mean-field theory (DMFT), producing a scheme in which diagonal (on-site energy) and off-diagonal (hopping) disorder are treated by the same coherent-potential self-consistency. Applied to the Anderson-Hubbard model on a simple cubic lattice at half filling, the method predicts that off-diagonal disorder substantially changes the Mott metal-insulator transition: it raises the critical interaction needed to enter and leave the metallic phase and widens the metallic window. At equal concentrations of two atomic species, the system is reentrant, going from insulating to metallic and back to insulating as U increases. The authors intend this as a practical computational route for disordered strongly correlated materials where hopping integrals vary from site to site, a regime that conventional CPA-based DMFT handles poorly.

What carries the argument

The key object is the decomposition of each random hopping amplitude into a site-dependent amplitude and a fixed reference hopping, t_{ij}^{Q_i,Q_j} = $x_i^{{Q_i}}$ S_{ij} $x_j^{{Q_j}}$ + \lambda_{ij}, which turns off-diagonal disorder into diagonal-like disorder in an enlarged 'coupling space' C = S \otimes T (orbital space times neighbor translation vectors). Within this space, a CPA self-consistency loop (Eqs. 10-14) determines an effective medium for the auxiliary Green's function g; the physical Green's function is recovered as G = g $X^{{-1}}$. DMFT is then grafted on: the self-energy is local, the impurity hybridization \$Delta_i^{{Q_i}}$ is computed from the ACPA physical Green's function, and the impurity solver (CT-QMC) returns a new self-energy that re-enters the ACPA loop. This machinery is what allows diagonal and off-diagonal disorder to be treated on the same footing.

What would settle it

Take the Fig. 8 model (c_A = c_B = 0.5, t_AA = t_BB = 0.5, crystal-field splitting 10) and run ACPA-DMFT with two different valid choices of $x_i^{{Q_i}}$ and lambda_ij that reproduce the same physical hoppings; if the insulator-metal-insulator boundaries in the U-t_AB plane shift beyond numerical accuracy, the central prediction is not well-defined. A complementary check is to compare the same phase diagram with exact quantum Monte Carlo on small supercells.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that ACPA-DMFT correctly captures the combined effect of diagonal and off-diagonal disorder on the Mott transition, and that the off-diagonal part is not a minor perturbation. For a binary simple-cubic alloy with fixed hoppings t_AA = 0.8, t_BB = 0.5, t_AB = 0.63, the metal-insulator transition as a function of concentration or of interaction U occurs at different thresholds than with the averaged hopping alone; increasing t_AB or t_BB drives a first-order transition seen as a discontinuous jump of the quasiparticle weights Z^A and Z^B from zero to finite values. In the symmetric half-filled case, the U-t_AB phase diagram shows a reentrant sequence: a band insulator at U=0, a metal for an intermediate window, and a Mott insulator again at large U. The authors attribute this to off-diagonal disorder renormalizing the effective bandwidth and the hybridization bath of each species, so the ratio U/D controlling the Mott transition is displaced and the metallic region grows with t_AB.

Load-bearing premise

The method's predictions are assumed not to depend on how each random hopping is split into $x_i^{{Q_i}}$ S_ij $x_j^{{Q_j}}$ + lambda_ij, but the amplitudes $x_i^{{Q_i}}$ are never specified or fitted, so different valid splits could in principle move the phase boundaries.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The Mott transition in a disordered alloy is not a simple average of its pure-component behaviors, because alloying changes the hybridization bath that each species feels; off-diagonal disorder shifts the critical doping and interaction thresholds.
  • Hopping amplitudes act as a continuous control knob: for fixed U, changing t_AB or t_BB across a critical value switches the system between insulator and metal through a first-order transition.
  • In the half-filled binary alloy, the system is reentrant in U, and raising t_AB pushes both transition points U1 and U2 to larger U while widening the metallic window |U2 - U1|.
  • Because the auxiliary medium in ACPA has a dimension independent of the number of alloy species, the method should remain computationally affordable for multi-component or multi-orbital disordered systems where BEB-CPA becomes expensive.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An open question the paper leaves implicit is the gauge freedom in Eq. (2): the amplitudes x_i^{Q_i} are never specified or fitted, so a natural follow-up is to test whether different valid decompositions of the same physical hoppings yield the same phase boundary.
  • The coupling-space construction is not tied to single-band DMFT, so it could plausibly be combined with multi-orbital or nonequilibrium impurity solvers to study orbital-selective Mott transitions or disorder effects on superconductivity.
  • The reentrant window suggests a materials-level prediction: in real disordered compounds, alloy composition and strain (which change hopping integrals) should be able to tune the metallic window without changing U, which could be tested in transport experiments on doped transition-metal oxides.
  • A benchmark against exact small-cluster quantum Monte Carlo with the same hopping disorder would tell whether the reentrant boundaries survive beyond the single-site approximations used here.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript extends the auxiliary coherent potential approximation (ACPA) to electronic systems with off-diagonal disorder and combines it with dynamical mean-field theory (DMFT), calling the resulting scheme ACPA-DMFT. The method is applied to the Anderson-Hubbard model on a simple cubic lattice with both diagonal and off-diagonal disorder. For the noninteracting case, the ACPA density of states is benchmarked against BEB-CPA and supercell results and shows good agreement. For the interacting case, the paper reports that off-diagonal disorder substantially modifies the Mott metal-insulator transition, including a reentrant insulator-metal-insulator sequence as the interaction strength U increases, plotted in a U-t_AB phase diagram. The paper also compares ACPA-DMFT with a constant-hopping CPA-DMFT to highlight the role of hopping disorder.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the ACPA-DMFT method would be a useful and computationally efficient tool for disordered strongly correlated systems, particularly because the U=0 benchmarks in Fig. 4 are convincing and the claimed O(N^3) per-k-point scaling relative to BEB-CPA is attractive. The paper also identifies an interesting physical scenario where off-diagonal disorder shifts and broadens the metallic region in the U-t_AB plane. However, the main new physical prediction, the reentrant metallic pocket for U>0, currently rests entirely on the ACPA-DMFT loop without an independent interacting benchmark, and the method contains an unspecified decomposition parameter that may affect the results. The work is therefore a promising methodological contribution whose central interacting-phase-diagram claim requires further validation before it can be accepted as established.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. II A, Eq. (2)] The decomposition t_{ij}^{Qi,Qj} = x_i^{Qi} S_{ij} x_j^{Qj} + λ_{ij} is not unique, and the manuscript never specifies how the amplitudes x_i^{Qi} are chosen or fitted. The text says 'x_{Qi}^{i} and x_{Qj}^{j} generically should be fitted from the chemical dependent hopping parameters,' but no fitting procedure, numerical values, or uniqueness criterion is provided. Since Eqs. (3)-(17) and Eq. (31) depend explicitly on x, different valid choices of x and S, λ could in principle lead to different ACPA self-consistency conditions and different phase boundaries. The authors should either specify a concrete, reproducible choice for x in the simple-cubic calculations or demonstrate numerically that the final Green's function and phase diagram are independent of this gauge freedom.
  2. [Sec. III B 3, Fig. 8] The phase diagram in Fig. 8 is constructed from the value of ImG(iω0) at the lowest Matsubara frequency, but the paper does not report the temperature, the value of ω0, the threshold used to separate metallic from insulating regions, or any error bars or convergence tests. At finite temperature, a single Matsubara-frequency point is not a reliable order parameter for a Mott transition; metallic and insulating states can be distinguished only by extrapolating to T→0 or by using another criterion such as the quasiparticle weight Z^Q of Eq. (32). The paper should specify the temperature and the criterion, and ideally show the β-dependence, before the reentrant region in Fig. 8 is presented as a phase boundary.
  3. [Sec. III B, Figs. 5-9] All interacting results are generated solely by the ACPA-DMFT loop of Sec. II C, and there is no independent benchmark for U>0. The U=0 comparison in Fig. 4 validates the ACPA treatment of off-diagonal disorder in the noninteracting limit, but it does not validate the combination of a species-dependent CT-QMC self-energy with the ACPA medium for U>0. The comparison with CPA-DMFT in Fig. 5 uses the same DMFT framework with a different disorder treatment and is not an external check. The authors should provide at least one independent interacting benchmark, such as exact diagonalization of small disordered clusters, supercell CT-QMC, or a comparison with BEB-CPA+DMFT on the same simple-cubic lattice, to support the central claim that the reentrant metallic pocket in Fig. 8 is physical rather than an artifact of the combined approximations.
  4. [Sec. III B 3, Fig. 9] The spectral functions in Fig. 9 are obtained by maximum-entropy analytic continuation, which is known to sometimes produce spurious peaks. The claim that the system becomes metallic at U=10 for t_AB=0.5 and at U=15 for t_AB=1.0, and then insulating again, relies on identifying a quasiparticle peak in the continued DOS. This identification should be corroborated by direct Matsubara data, for example by showing ImG(iω_n) as a function of n or by computing Z^Q for the same parameter sets, rather than by visual inspection of MaxEnt spectra.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract contains minor language issues such as 'matsubara' and 'maximum entropy' capitalization, and the phrase 'the diagonal and off-diagonal disorders are treated in a unified and self-consistent framework' is a bit long; a careful proofread is recommended.
  2. [Fig. 4 caption] The caption states 'cA = cB = 0.5' while the panel legends specify cA = 0.1, 0.6, 0.6, and 0.5. This inconsistency should be corrected.
  3. [Sec. III B 1, Fig. 5] The sentence 'the the presence of quasiparticle peak' contains a duplicated article; there are several similar typos throughout the text (e.g., 'summarrize,' 'presnt,' 'theoretic') that should be corrected.
  4. [Sec. III A] The computational-cost comparison between ACPA and BEB-CPA is stated only for the noninteracting Green's-function evaluation and does not include the CT-QMC cost in the DMFT loop; a brief clarification that the O(N^3) scaling applies to the ACPA part only would avoid overstatement.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the reentrant MIT is an emergent fixed-point result, not a fitted or self-referential consequence.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The ACPA transformation (Eq.2) is an exact algebraic rewriting G=(z-H)^{-1}=gX^{-1} (Eq.8); although the x amplitudes are said to be 'fitted from the chemical dependent hopping parameters', no parameter of the target Mott transition or of the reentrant sequence is used to fix them, and the U=0 ACPA DOS is benchmarked against external supercell and BEB-CPA calculations (Fig.4), providing independent support for the disorder treatment. The ACPA-DMFT loop (Eqs.13-17 and 26-31, summarized in Fig.2) is a self-consistent fixed-point scheme: the species-dependent self-energy enters Eq.31, the ACPA medium yields G_ii^Q via Eq.16, the hybridization (Eq.26) defines the impurity model, and the impurity solver returns a new self-energy; the phase diagram in Fig.8 is read from the converged ImG(iω0), an output of this loop, with no parameter tuned to produce the insulator-metal-insulator sequence. The consistency check against BEB-CPA+DMFT [32] and CPA+DMFT [12] is an external comparison (no author overlap) and is presented as agreement, not as an input constraint. Self-citations ([35-41] for ACPA phonon work and [50,53] for the CT-QMC and MaxEnt implementations) are method/code citations rather than load-bearing evidence; no uniqueness theorem from the authors is invoked to forbid alternative disorder treatments. The paper does leave open the explicit fitting protocol for x and provides no independent U>0 benchmark, but these are well-definedness and validation concerns, not circular reductions of the central claim.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the ACPA approximation itself (single-site CPA in an auxiliary space), the DMFT local self-energy approximation, and the unstated gauge choice of the hopping decomposition amplitudes x. The auxiliary coupling space is an invented mathematical device, not a physical entity. The lack of a specified x-fitting procedure is the most consequential free parameter.

free parameters (3)
  • x_i^{Qi} (hopping decomposition amplitudes)
    Introduced in Eq.2; the paper says they should be fitted from the chemical-dependent hopping parameters but gives no fitting formula. The ACPA result may depend on this choice, and the paper does not test gauge independence.
  • Maximum entropy default model and regularization
    Spectral functions are obtained with the ACFlow package; the default model and regularization parameter are not reported, and these affect the real-frequency DOS shapes.
  • energy broadening eta = 0.05
    Used for DOS calculations; small artificial broadening chosen by hand that affects peak widths, though likely not the phase boundaries.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Single-site CPA in the auxiliary coupling space accurately captures off-diagonal disorder.
    The method replaces the disordered medium with a one-site effective medium (Eqs.10-14). Validated only at U=0 against supercell; no interacting benchmark.
  • domain assumption DMFT local self-energy approximation remains valid in the presence of off-diagonal disorder.
    The self-energy is taken to be site-diagonal throughout; standard DMFT but not assessed for accuracy with hopping disorder.
  • domain assumption The conditionally averaged Green's function from ACPA provides the correct impurity bath.
    The hybridization function Delta is computed from the ACPA conditional GF via Eq.26; this assumes the single-site ACPA environment represents the true lattice environment for each species in the interacting case.
invented entities (1)
  • Auxiliary coupling space C = S ⊗ T
    purpose: Extended local space combining orbital space with translation vectors to neighboring sites, used to map off-diagonal disorder into diagonal-like disorder in an auxiliary medium.
    A mathematical construction with no direct physical observable. The physical Green's function is recovered by a projection onto the T0 component, but the projection is not rigorously defined in the paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Auxiliary dynamical mean-field approach for Anderson-Hubbard model with off-diagonal disorder." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IBFX43NE

@misc{pith2026250207353,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Auxiliary dynamical mean-field approach for Anderson-Hubbard model with off-diagonal disorder},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IBFX43NE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.07353}
}
read the original abstract

This work reports a theoretical framework that combines the auxiliary coherent potential approximation (ACPA-DMFT) with dynamical mean-field theory to study strongly correlated and disordered electronic systems with both diagonal and off-diagonal disorders. In this method, by introducing an auxiliary coupling space with extended local degree of freedom,the diagonal and off-diagonal disorders are treated in a unified and self-consistent framework of coherent potential approximation, within which the dynamical mean-field theory is naturally combined to handle the strongly correlated Anderson-Hubbard model. By using this approach, we compute matsubara Green's functions for a simple cubic lattice at finite temperatures and derive impurity spectral functions through the maximum entropy method. Our results reveal the critical influence of off-diagonal disorder on Mott-type metal-insulator transitions. Specifically, a reentrant phenomenon is identified, where the system transitions between insulating and metallic states under varying interaction strengths. The ACPA-DMFT method provides an efficient and robust computational method for exploring the intricate interplay of disorder and strong correlations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.07353 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic illustration of ACPA idea in a 2D lat [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Self-consistent loop of ACPA+DMFT for strongely correlated Anderson-Hubbard model with off-diagonal disorders. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Schematic illustration of a simple cubic lattice with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. A comparison of density of state (DOS) with the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. A comparison of DOS with the ACPA-DMFT (solid [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Quasi-particle weight [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Phase diagram of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: (b) and (g). With further increase of U, shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Influence of alloying concentration and U We first investigate the effects of doping concentra- tion in the presence of off-diagonal disorders. We con- sider the fixed hopping disorders with the parameters tAA = 0 .8, tBB = 0 .5 and tAB = 0 .63, and fixed local disorders UA = 6.0, UB = 9, ϵA/B = −UA/B/2 satisfying the half-filling condition. To compare wi...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Influence of hopping disorder To study the effect of hopping parameter tAB on the phase transition, we computed the DOS results for different tAB values by using ACPA+DMFT, as shown in Fig. 6(a-d). We fix tAA = 1 .0, tBB = 0 .3, the in- teractions UA = 8, UB = 9 and ϵA/B = −UA/B/2. In Fig. 6(a-d), we plot the DOS for tAB varying from 0.5 to 0.8. It is cle...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Phase diagram for disordered and strongly correlated system For the reentrance phenomenon reported on the Bethe lattice in Ref.[32], we aim to observe a similar phe- 9 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 −10 0 100.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 −10 0 10 −10 0 10 −10 0 10 −10 0 10 ACPA contribution of A contribution of B ω U = 0 U = 0 tAB = 0.5(a) tAB = 1.0(f) tAB = 0.5 tAB ...

    work page

  4. [4]

    P. A. Lee and T. V. Ramakrishnan, Rev. Mod. Phys. 57, 287 (1985)

    1985

  5. [5]

    Evers and A

    F. Evers and A. D. Mirlin, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 1355 (2008)

    2008

  6. [6]

    Imada, A

    M. Imada, A. Fujimori, and Y. Tokura, Rev. Mod. Phys. 70, 1039 (1998)

    1998

  7. [7]

    Mott, Metal-Insulator Transitions (1st ed.) , Physical Sciences (CRC Press, 1990)

    N. Mott, Metal-Insulator Transitions (1st ed.) , Physical Sciences (CRC Press, 1990)

    work page 1990

  8. [8]

    N. F. Mott, Proceedings of the Physical Society. Section A 62, 416 (1949)

    work page 1949

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    Abrahams, 50 Years of Anderson Localization (WORLD SCIENTIFIC, 2010)

    E. Abrahams, 50 Years of Anderson Localization (WORLD SCIENTIFIC, 2010)

    2010

  2. [10]

    Zhu and D

    W. Zhu and D. N. Sheng, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 056804 (2019)

    2019

  3. [11]

    Prozorov, J

    R. Prozorov, J. A. Sauls, P. Hirschfeld, N. E. Hussey, and M. Iavarone, Frontiers in Physics 12, 10.3389/fphy.2024.1478445 (2024)

    2024

  4. [12]

    A. Garg, M. Randeria, and N. Trivedi, Nature Phys. 4, 762 (2008)

    2008

  5. [13]

    Chakraborty, T

    D. Chakraborty, T. L¨ ofwander, M. Fogelstr¨ om, and A. M. Black-Schaffer, npj Quantum Mater. 7, 44 (2022)

    2022

  6. [14]

    Paalanen, D

    M. Paalanen, D. Tsui, A. Gossard, and J. Hwang, Solid State Communications 50, 841 (1984)

    1984

  7. [15]

    Lombardo, R

    P. Lombardo, R. Hayn, and G. I. Japaridze, Phys. Rev. B 74, 085116 (2006)

    2006

  8. [16]

    Metzner and D

    W. Metzner and D. Vollhardt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 324 (1989)

    1989

  9. [17]

    Jarrell, Phys

    M. Jarrell, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 168 (1992)

    1992

  10. [18]

    Georges and G

    A. Georges and G. Kotliar, Phys. Rev. B 45, 6479 (1992)

    1992

  11. [21]

    Georges, G

    A. Georges, G. Kotliar, W. Krauth, and M. J. Rozenberg, Rev. Mod. Phys. 68, 13 (1996)

    1996

  12. [22]

    Kotliar, S

    G. Kotliar, S. Y. Savrasov, K. Haule, V. S. Oudovenko, O. Parcollet, and C. A. Marianetti, Rev. Mod. Phys. 78, 865 (2006)

    2006

  13. [23]

    M¨ uller-Hartmann, Z

    E. M¨ uller-Hartmann, Z. Physik B - Condensed Matter 76, 211 (1989)

    1989

  14. [24]

    Gonis, Green Functions for Ordered and Disor- dered Systems , Studies in mathematical physics (North- Holland, 1992)

    A. Gonis, Green Functions for Ordered and Disor- dered Systems , Studies in mathematical physics (North- Holland, 1992)

    1992

  15. [25]

    R. J. Elliott, J. A. Krumhansl, and P. L. Leath, Rev. Mod. Phys. 46, 465 (1974)

    1974

  16. [26]

    Soven, Phys

    P. Soven, Phys. Rev. 156, 809 (1967)

    1967

  17. [27]

    D. W. Taylor, Phys. Rev. 156, 1017 (1967)

    1967

  18. [28]

    Velick´ y, S

    B. Velick´ y, S. Kirkpatrick, and H. Ehrenreich, Phys. Rev. 175, 747 (1968)

    1968

  19. [29]

    Dohner, H

    E. Dohner, H. Terletska, K.-M. Tam, J. Moreno, and H. F. Fotso, Phys. Rev. B 106, 195156 (2022)

    2022

  20. [30]

    Yan and P

    J. Yan and P. Werner, Phys. Rev. B 108, 125143 (2023). 11

    2023

  21. [31]

    A. I. Poteryaev, N. A. Skorikov, V. I. Anisimov, and M. A. Korotin, Phys. Rev. B 93, 205135 (2016)

    2016

  22. [32]

    Milovanovi´ c, S

    M. Milovanovi´ c, S. Sachdev, and R. N. Bhatt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 63, 82 (1989)

    1989

  23. [33]

    Ulmke and R

    M. Ulmke and R. T. Scalettar, Phys. Rev. B 55, 4149 (1997)

    1997

  24. [34]

    P. J. H. Denteneer, R. T. Scalettar, and N. Trivedi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 146401 (2001)

    2001

  25. [35]

    A. Weh, Y. Zhang, A. ¨Ostlin, H. Terletska, D. Bauern- feind, K.-M. Tam, H. G. Evertz, K. Byczuk, D. Vollhardt, and L. Chioncel, Phys. Rev. B 104, 045127 (2021)

    2021

  26. [36]

    Dobrosavljevi´ c and G

    V. Dobrosavljevi´ c and G. Kotliar, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 3218 (1993)

    1993

  27. [37]

    Dobrosavljevi´ c and G

    V. Dobrosavljevi´ c and G. Kotliar, Phys. Rev. B50, 1430 (1994)

    1994

  28. [38]

    Cheng, M

    Z. Cheng, M. Sang, J. Zhai, and Y. Ke, Phys. Rev. B 100, 214206 (2019)

    2019

  29. [39]

    J. Zhai, R. Xue, Z. Cheng, and Y. Ke, Phys. Rev. B 104, 024205 (2021)

    2021

  30. [40]

    Cheng, J

    Z. Cheng, J. Zhai, Q. Zhang, and Y. Ke, Phys. Rev. B 99, 134202 (2019)

    2019

  31. [41]

    J. Zhai, Q. Zhang, Z. Cheng, J. Ren, Y. Ke, and B. Li, Phys. Rev. B 99, 195429 (2019)

    2019

  32. [42]

    Q. Wei, J. Zhai, Z. Ning, and Y. Ke, Phys. Rev. B 106, 214205 (2022)

    2022

  33. [43]

    J. Zhai, Z. Cheng, Y. Zhang, and Y. Ke, Phys. Rev. B 109, 094203 (2024)

    2024

  34. [44]

    R. Cui, Z. Zhang, Q. Wei, Y. Zhang, and Y. Ke, Phys. Rev. B Submitted for publication

  35. [45]

    Werner, A

    P. Werner, A. Comanac, L. de’ Medici, M. Troyer, and A. J. Millis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 076405 (2006)

    2006

  36. [46]

    Vollhardt, K

    D. Vollhardt, K. Byczuk, and M. Kollar, Dynamical mean-field theory, in Strongly Correlated Systems: The- oretical Methods , edited by A. Avella and F. Mancini (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012) pp. 203–236

    2012

  37. [47]

    E. Gull, A. J. Millis, A. I. Lichtenstein, A. N. Rubtsov, M. Troyer, and P. Werner, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 349 (2011)

    2011

  38. [48]

    Q. Si, M. J. Rozenberg, G. Kotliar, and A. E. Rucken- stein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 2761 (1994)

    1994

  39. [49]

    Caffarel and W

    M. Caffarel and W. Krauth, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 1545 (1994)

    1994

  40. [50]

    Capone, L

    M. Capone, L. de’ Medici, and A. Georges, Phys. Rev. B 76, 245116 (2007)

    2007

  41. [51]

    K. G. Wilson, Rev. Mod. Phys. 47, 773 (1975)

    1975

  42. [52]

    Bulla, T

    R. Bulla, T. A. Costi, and T. Pruschke, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 395 (2008)

    2008

  43. [53]

    Huang, Y

    L. Huang, Y. Wang, Z. Y. Meng, L. Du, P. Werner, and X. Dai, Computer Physics Communications 195, 140–160 (2015)

    2015

  44. [54]

    J. E. Gubernatis, M. Jarrell, R. N. Silver, and D. S. Sivia, Phys. Rev. B 44, 6011 (1991)

    1991

  45. [55]

    Jarrell and J

    M. Jarrell and J. Gubernatis, Physics Reports 269, 133 (1996)

    1996

  46. [56]

    Huang, Computer Physics Communications 292, 108863 (2023)

    L. Huang, Computer Physics Communications 292, 108863 (2023)

    2023

  47. [57]

    Hubbard, Proc

    J. Hubbard, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 276, 238–257 (1963)

    1963

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.