Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 46 references

A Phase Space Electronic Structure View of The Solid State

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves a q-dependent Nafie equality for periodic solids and argues that a phase-space Hamiltonian with a local approximate coupling operator can extract nuclear-induced electronic momentum from plain band-structure…

desk verdict Solid formal result on a q-dependent Nafie equality for periodic solids, but the practical claim of extracting electron-phonon information without Berry curvature rests on an unvalidated local approximation. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.06260 v1 pith:3WJUDSEV submitted 2026-08-06 physics.chem-ph

Nadine Bradbury , Joseph Subotnik This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.chem-ph PACS 71.38.-k71.15.-m
keywords phasespaceelectronicstructurenon-Born-OppenheimerNafieequalityelectron-phononcouplingnuclearmomentumbandBerrycurvature-freeWigner-Weyltransform
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 argues that the standard frozen-nucleus picture of solids silently drops the momentum nuclei impart to electrons, and that a phase-space electronic Hamiltonian, with bands depending on nuclear momentum as well as position, can restore it. Its central result is a proof that a wavevector-resolved version of Nafie's molecular equality holds in periodic systems, linking the q-dependent change of electronic position under a phonon displacement to the change of electronic momentum under the conjugate nuclear momentum. The paper then proposes to approximate the derivative couplings by a local operator built from a Gaussian partition of unity, so that this momentum transfer can be read off by diagonalizing a momentum-dependent Hamiltonian at ordinary band-structure cost, without computing Berry curvature. If correct, this opens a practical route to electron-phonon and inertial effects, such as band renormalization and momentum-induced band crossings, in ab initio solids. A one-dimensional semiconductor model supports the equality with best agreement near q=0, and a metallic two-site model shows nuclear momentum shifting, and sometimes splitting, the bands.

What carries the argument

The argument runs on two linked objects. First, the q-dependent Nafie equality, written as a symmetry of a mixed nuclear-electronic curvature tensor, $$\$\Omega$^q_{nk}(Q_{Aq},\tilde{k}) = -\frac{M_A\hbar}{m_e}\$\Omega$^q_{nk}(\Pi_{A,-q},r),$$ which is equivalent to Eq. (11) and is exact when the electronic states are exact. Second, the phase-space Hamiltonian $$$H^{{PS}}$_k(R,P) = \sum_A \frac{(P_A - i\hbar \Gamma_{A,q=0,k})^2}{2M_A} + \frac{(\hat p+\hbar k)^2}{2m_e}+V(r,R),$$ where $$\Gamma_{Aq}(r) = \frac{1}{2i\hbar}\sum_\ell \left[\theta_{A\ell}(r)$e^{{iR_\ell\cdot q}}$\hat p + \hat p $e^{{iR_\ell\cdot q}}$\theta_{A\ell}(r) - \hbar q $e^{{iR_\ell\cdot q}}$\theta_{A\ell}(r)\right]$$ is built from a normalized Gaussian partition of unity $\theta_{A\ell}$ of width $\sigma$. The Gamma operator does the load-bearing work: it replaces the exact derivative coupling $d_{Aq}$ from the Born-Huang expansion, obeys the same sum rule $i\hbar\sum_A\Gamma_{A,q=0}=\hat p$ and the same crystal-momentum selection rule $\delta_{k',k+q}$, and lets the electronic momentum be obtained by diagonalizing a momentum-dependent Hamiltonian rather than by computing Berry curvature.

What would settle it

In a three-dimensional solid with a known DFPT implementation, evaluate the exact left side of Eq. (11) from the derivative couplings and compare it with the right side computed through $\Gamma$ at $\sigma\approx 1$ bohr across the full Brillouin zone; a ratio far from unity for optical or zone-boundary phonons, or a strong dependence on $\sigma$, would falsify the claim that $\Gamma$ replaces the derivative coupling.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Within a Wigner-Weyl treatment of nuclear degrees of freedom, the authors prove that periodic solids satisfy a wavevector-resolved analogue of Nafie's equality: $$\frac{\partial\langle \psi_{nk}|\hat r|\psi_{nk}\rangle_q}{\partial Q_{Aq}} = \frac{M_A}{m_e}\frac{\partial\langle\psi_{nk}|\hat p|\psi_{nk}\rangle_q}{\partial \Pi_{A,-q}},$$ evaluated at $\Pi=0$, with the left side expressible in closed form through the standard DFPT perturbation $\delta W_{Aq}$ and band-structure ingredients. They then claim this relation supports a practical shortcut: replace the exact derivative coupling with the local operator $\Gamma_{Aq}$ of Eq. (17), so that the nuclear-induced electronic momentum, the piece usually obtained from Berry curvature, comes out of diagonalizing the phase-space Hamiltonian Eq. (19). In a one-dimensional semiconductor model the approximate equality holds with a Brillouin-zone-averaged ratio of 1.16, best near $q=0$, and in a two-site metallic model nuclear momentum shifts the bands, creates crossings, and produces nonzero electronic momentum only when the nuclear motion breaks symmetry.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the local operator $\Gamma$, built by splitting space with Gaussian blobs of width $\sigma$, faithfully reproduces the true derivative coupling for real phonons; the paper establishes only the q=0 sum rule and one one-dimensional semiconductor check.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Diagonalizing $H^{PS}$ gives both band energies and nuclear-induced electronic momentum for finite $P$, so momentum transfer between nuclei and electrons no longer requires a separate Berry curvature calculation.
  • Classical dynamics on a single phase-space eigensurface conserve total momentum, in contrast to conventional Born-Oppenheimer dynamics.
  • For exact derivative couplings, the q-dependent Nafie equality holds exactly; with $\Gamma$ in place of $d$, the one-dimensional semiconductor model recovers the equality with an average ratio of 1.16 and near-unity quality for q close to zero.
  • In the metallic two-site model, an optical phonon produces no electronic momentum, an acoustic phonon shifts the Brillouin zone uniformly, and a symmetry-breaking single-atom motion yields an avoided crossing, showing that nuclear momentum can re-shape band structure.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The authors leave implicit that the $\sigma$-independence of $\Gamma$-based results could serve as a practical convergence test: if nuclear-induced momentum changes materially when the Gaussian width is varied, the approximation is not converged for that phonon.
  • If the method transfers to two and three dimensions, electron-phonon inertial effects could become a post-processing step on ordinary band-structure data, skipping response-theory calculations for quantities like the atomic polar tensor.
  • Because $\Gamma$ has no energy denominator, it is formally better behaved than exact derivative couplings at band crossings, though the same feature makes its justification via perturbation theory weakest precisely in degenerate systems.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a phase-space electronic structure approach for periodic solids, in which electronic bands depend on both nuclear position Q and nuclear momentum Π. The central formal result is a q-dependent analogue of Nafie's equality (Eq. 11), derived in the Supplementary Material, relating the change in a q-dependent electronic position expectation value with respect to a phonon coordinate Q_Aq to the change in electronic momentum with respect to the conjugate nuclear momentum Π_{A,-q}. The manuscript then introduces an approximate operator Γ_{Aq}(r) (Eq. 17), built from a Gaussian partition of unity, to replace the exact derivative coupling d_{Aq}, and uses it to define a phase-space Hamiltonian H_PS (Eq. 19). The approximation is tested in a one-dimensional one-electron model by comparing the exact and approximate sides of Nafie's equality (Fig. 1), and the H_PS Hamiltonian is used to compute band structures and nuclear-induced electronic momentum for three nuclear-motion scenarios (Fig. 2). The paper claims that this enables extracting electron-phonon information without Berry-curvature calculations.

Significance. If the formal q-dependent Nafie equality (Eq. 11) is correct, it is a valuable extension of molecular sum rules to periodic solids, connecting derivative couplings, Berry-curvature-like tensors, and momentum conservation. The proof in the Supplementary Material is detailed and appears internally consistent, and the symmetry relation in Eq. 15 is a clean formal statement. The practical claim, however, rests on the unproven faithfulness of the approximate operator Γ_{Aq}. The manuscript provides a machine-checkable-style derivation for the exact equality, a reproducible one-dimensional model, and explicit expressions for the Γ matrix elements; these are strengths. At the same time, the validation is limited to a single 1D one-electron model with a BZ-averaged ratio of 1.16 rather than 1, no q-resolved worst-case or σ-convergence study, and, as detailed below, the operator actually used in H_PS is not the operator validated in Fig. 1. The potential payoff—estimating non-adiabatic electronic momentum from a band-structure calculation without Berry curvature—is significant if the approximation can be established, but at present the evidence does not support the central applied claim.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4, Eqs. 19 and 21; Fig. 1] There is a disconnect between the validation and the proposed practical Hamiltonian. The validation in Fig. 1 tests Nafie's equality using the finite-q operator Γ_{Aq} in Eq. 21, whereas the phase-space Hamiltonian H_PS in Eq. 19 contains only the q=0 operator Γ_{A,q=0}. Consequently, diagonalizing H_PS cannot produce finite-q electron-phonon matrix elements or q-dependent nuclear-induced electronic momentum. Fig. 2 varies only zone-center nuclear momenta P_A, so it does not demonstrate extraction of finite-q electron-phonon information. This undercuts the abstract's claim that electron-phonon interactions can be extracted from simple band structure calculations without Berry curvature, unless the scope is explicitly restricted to q=0.
  2. [Eq. 17 and SM §IV] The approximation Γ_{Aq} is an ad hoc local operator built from a Gaussian partition of unity with a hand-chosen broadening σ. The only exact property proven is the q=0 sum rule −iℏ Σ_A Γ_{A,q=0} = p (Eq. 159), which is satisfied by infinitely many operators and constrains only the total momentum, not the individual matrix elements ⟨u_{m,k+q}|Γ_{Aq}|u_{n,k}⟩ that enter the physical predictions. The numeric validation in Fig. 1 reports an average LHS/RHS ratio of 1.16 rather than 1, with no q-resolved worst-case analysis and no σ-convergence study. Thus the claim that Γ_{Aq} faithfully approximates the exact derivative coupling d_{Aq} at finite q is not established, and the central practical result—using Γ in place of d—is unsupported.
  3. [Eq. 12 vs. Eq. 21; Fig. 1] The exact LHS in Eq. 12 has a squared energy denominator, whereas the approximate RHS in Eq. 21 has only a linear denominator. These expressions coincide only if Γ_{Aq} equals the full derivative coupling d_{Aq}, including its energy-denominator structure. The test in Fig. 1 compares these two different expressions and reports an average deviation of about 16%; for near-degenerate bands the linear-versus-quadratic denominator difference will amplify any error in Γ. A direct comparison of the matrix elements of Γ_{Aq} and d_{Aq} (or a q-resolved and σ-converged test) is needed to support the approximation.
  4. [SM §III.B and Fig. 2] The formal derivation of Nafie's equality assumes non-degenerate bands and uses intermediate normalization to discard diagonal terms (SM Eqs. 63–69). Fig. 2, however, deliberately uses a metallic ground state with degenerate bands, where the energy denominators in Eq. 7 and Eq. 12 can vanish and the perturbation-theoretic derivation requires qualification. The paper does not explain how the exact equality or the approximate Γ-based test extends to the metallic case, so the physical interpretation of the band crossings and 'missing momentum' in Fig. 2 is not grounded in the derived formalism.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. 20] The notation ∂_r in Eq. 20 is not defined; it should be written as ∂/∂r for clarity.
  2. [Eq. 22] Eq. 22 has an unmatched parenthesis in the denominator: '⟨ψ_{1k}(P=0)|P_A · Γ_A |ψ_{0k}(P=0⟩' should have the closing bracket after |ψ_{0k}(P=0)⟩.
  3. [Fig. 1 caption] The caption says 'we plot the ratio of the LHS in Eq. 12 and RHS in Eq. 21' but the figure actually plots the ratio of the LHS to the RHS; please rephrase to avoid ambiguity.
  4. [§4 heading] There is a typo in the section heading: 'eletronic' should be 'electronic'.
  5. [Discussion] The sentence 'as q increases, electronic orbitals increases' is unclear because q does not appear in the Hamiltonian H_PS of Eq. 19; please clarify what quantity is plotted as a function of q in Fig. 2.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

Exact q-dependent Nafie equality is proven self-containedly; the practical extraction rests on an explicitly labeled Gamma ansatz, which is a validity gap rather than a circular reduction.

full rationale

The formal derivation chain for Eq. 11 is self-contained. The SM evaluates the LHS by mapping r to i d/dk and the RHS from the Born-Huang Wigner Hamiltonian H'_W, and both sides reduce to the same sum over delta-W and dH/dk matrix elements (SM Eq. 113 vs. Eq. 128). No fitted parameter, no imported uniqueness theorem, and no self-citation is needed for this proof. The approximate phase-space Hamiltonian is explicitly introduced as an "ansatz" and a "hypothesis" (Section 'An approximate PS theory', Eq. 17), and the numerical validation in Fig. 1 compares the exact LHS Eq. 12 with the Gamma-based RHS Eq. 21, i.e. an in-paper benchmark against the exact theorem. The average ratio of 1.16 and the statement "we find best agreement ... for q close to zero" acknowledge the approximation rather than hiding it. The load-bearing practical quantity, the nuclear-induced electronic momentum in Fig. 2, is indeed a direct consequence of the Gamma operator inserted into H_PS (see Eq. 22), so if Gamma misrepresents the exact derivative coupling d_{Aq} at finite q, the extracted momenta will be wrong. That is a serious validity risk, but it is not a circular derivation: Gamma is not fitted to the extracted momentum, and the exact Nafie equality is proven independently of Gamma. The self-citation to the authors' prior phase-space work (SM Eq. 135, Ref. [10]) supplies the Gamma ansatz but does not by itself close the derivation; the paper's formal result stands on its own. No equation was found that is equal to another by construction in a way that undermines the claimed derivation.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The central formal result relies on standard Wigner-Weyl and first-order perturbation machinery. The approximate Gamma introduces a hand-chosen width sigma and a partition-of-unity ansatz; the only test is self-consistency with Nafie equality in one 1D model. No independent experimental or ab initio benchmark is provided.

free parameters (2)
  • sigma = 2 bohr (Fig 1), 0.5 bohr (Fig 2)
    Gaussian partition-of-unity width in theta_{Aell}(r), Eq 18. Chosen by hand; no systematic study or optimization; affects the strength and spatial range of Gamma and therefore the predicted electronic momentum and band shifts.
  • model potential parameters (Z_A, g, a, rho) = Z_A=2, Z_B=2, g=1, a=5.37, rho=1 or 0
    Parameters of the 1D Lorentzian potential in SM Eq 169. Define a toy semiconducting or metallic system; not fitted to any physical material.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Wigner-Weyl transforms commute with linear canonical coordinate changes
    Used to change from nuclear coordinates R,P to phonon coordinates Q,Pi in the main text and SM Section 1A.
  • domain assumption Moyal star product can be truncated at second order in hbar and the zeta term neglected
    Main text Eq 6; standard Born-Huang and semiclassical approximation, not justified in detail for strong electron-phonon coupling.
  • domain assumption Periodic Bloch framework can be analytically continued to slightly disordered nuclear configurations
    SM Section II; needed to define derivative couplings at finite Q when strict periodicity is lost.
  • ad hoc to paper The q-dependent expectation value <A>_q = integral psi* e^{-iq.r} A psi is the correct solid-state analogue of molecular expectation values
    Eq 10; for q nonzero it is complex and non-observable, yet the Nafie equality is stated for it.
  • ad hoc to paper The partition-of-unity theta and Gamma ansatz (Eq 17) approximates the true derivative coupling
    Main text Eq 17; only justified by the sum rule -i hbar sum Gamma = p and by consistency with Nafie equality in a toy model.
invented entities (2)
  • Gamma_{Aq}(r) operator
    purpose: Stand-in for the exact derivative coupling d_{Aq} in the phase-space Hamiltonian; generates nuclear-induced electronic momentum without Berry curvature calculation.
    No comparison with exact DFPT derivative couplings or experimental observables; only tested against the authors' own Nafie equality in a 1D model.
  • q-dependent electronic expectation value <A>_q
    purpose: Generalized observable that makes Nafie equality well-defined in periodic boundary conditions.
    Defined in Eq 10; for q nonzero it is complex and not directly measurable; used as a formal device.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Phase Space Electronic Structure View of The Solid State." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3WJUDSEV

@misc{pith2026260806260,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Phase Space Electronic Structure View of The Solid State},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3WJUDSEV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.06260}
}
abstract

We develop a phase space electronic structure view of the solid state, where electronic bands are parameterized by both nuclear position $\mathbf{Q}$ and nuclear momentum $\mathbf{\Pi}$ (rather than the standard practice of only $\mathbf{Q}$). Within this phase space, non-Born-Oppenheimer electronic structure context, we prove a nuclear wavevector ($\mathbf{q}$)-dependent version of Nafie's equality relating the change in electronic momentum as a function of nuclear momentum, $\partial \langle\mathbf{p}\rangle/\partial \mathbf{\Pi}_q$, to the change in electronic position as a function of nuclear position, $\partial \langle\mathbf{r}\rangle/\partial \mathbf{Q}q$. Furthermore, we show how information about electron-phonon interactions, specifically nuclear-induced electronic momentum, can be extracted from simple band structure calculations -- without Berry curvature calculations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.06260 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: In the centrally located colored density [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: We evaluate both the band energies (top) and the extra electron momentum (bottom) induced by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages

  1. [2]

    Saito, K

    T. Saito, K. Misaki, H. Ishizuka, and N. Nagaosa, Berry phase of phonons and thermal hall effect in nonmagnetic insulators, Physical Review Letters 123, 10.1103/physrevlett.123.255901 (2019)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.123.255901 2019

  2. [4]

    Miglio, V

    A. Miglio, V. Brousseau-Couture, E. Godbout, G. Antonius, Y.-H. Chan, S. G. Louie, M. Cˆ ot´ e, M. Giantomassi, and X. Gonze, Predominance of non-adiabatic effects in zero-point renormalization of the electronic band gap, npj Computational Ma- terials6, 10.1038/s41524-020-00434-z (2020)

    doi:10.1038/s41524-020-00434-z 2020

  3. [5]

    Hill and J

    E. Hill and J. H. Van Vleck, On the quantum me- chanics of the rotational distortion of multiplets in molecular spectra, Physical Review32, 250 (1928)

    work page 1928

  4. [6]

    J. H. Van Vleck, Onσ-type doubling and electron spin in the spectra of diatomic molecules, Physical Review33, 467–506 (1929)

    work page 1929

  5. [7]

    Tarczay, P

    G. Tarczay, P. G. Szalay, and J. Gauss, First- principles calculation of electron spin-rotation ten- sors, The Journal of Physical Chemistry A114, 9246 (2010)

    work page 2010

  6. [8]

    Lefebvre-Brion and R

    H. Lefebvre-Brion and R. W. Field,The Spectra and Dynamics of Diatomic Molecules: Revised and En- larged Edition(Elsevier Academic Press, Amster- dam, 2004)

    work page 2004

  7. [9]

    Einstein and W

    A. Einstein and W. De Haas, Experimental proof of the existence of amp` ere’s molecular currents, in Proc. KNA W, Vol. 181 (1915) p. 696

    work page 1915

  8. [10]

    Ganzhorn, S

    M. Ganzhorn, S. Klyatskfaya, M. Ruben, and W. Wernsdorfer, Quantum einstein-de haas effect, Nature Communications7, 10.1038/ncomms11443 (2016)

    work page doi:10.1038/ncomms11443 2016

Show all 46 references
  1. [11]

    T. M. Wallis, J. Moreland, and P. Kabos, Ein- stein–de haas effect in a NiFe film deposited on 7 a microcantilever, Applied Physics Letters89, 10.1063/1.2355445 (2006)

    2006 doi

  2. [12]

    Basini, M

    M. Basini, M. Pancaldi, B. Wehinger, M. Udina, V. Unikandanunni, T. Tadano, M. C. Hoffmann, A. V. Balatsky, and S. Bonetti, Terahertz electric- field-driven dynamical multiferroicity in SrTiO 3, Nature628, 534–539 (2024)

    2024

  3. [15]

    S. Ren, J. Bonini, M. Stengel, C. E. Dreyer, and D. Vanderbilt, Adiabatic dynamics of coupled spins and phonons in magnetic insulators, Physical Re- view X14, 10.1103/physrevx.14.011041 (2024)

    2024 doi

  4. [16]

    Cohen, R

    G. Cohen, R. Steinitz-Eliyahu, E. K. U. Gross, S. Refaely-Abramson, and R. Requist, Nonadia- baticity from first principles: Exact-factorization approach for solids, Physical Review B112, 10.1103/dmpv-zqdh (2025)

    2025 doi

  5. [17]

    Abedi, N

    A. Abedi, N. T. Maitra, and E. K. U. Gross, Ex- act factorization of the time-dependent electron- nuclear wave function, Physical Review Letters105, 10.1103/physrevlett.105.123002 (2010)

    2010 doi

  6. [18]

    Giustino, Electron-phonon interactions from first principles, Reviews of Modern Physics89, 10.1103/revmodphys.89.015003 (2017)

    F. Giustino, Electron-phonon interactions from first principles, Reviews of Modern Physics89, 10.1103/revmodphys.89.015003 (2017)

    2017 doi

  7. [19]

    Mohanty and E

    V. Mohanty and E. J. Heller, Lazy electrons in graphene, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences116, 18316–18321 (2019)

    2019

  8. [20]

    Shenvi, Phase-space surface hopping: Nonadia- batic dynamics in a superadiabatic basis, J

    N. Shenvi, Phase-space surface hopping: Nonadia- batic dynamics in a superadiabatic basis, J. Comp. Phys.130, 124117 (2009)

    2009

  9. [21]

    Duston, Z

    T. Duston, Z. Tao, X. Bian, M. Bhati, J. Rawlin- son, R. G. Littlejohn, Z. Pei, Y. Shao, and J. E. Subotnik, A phase-space electronic hamiltonian for vibrational circular dichroism, Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 10.1021/acs.jctc.4c00662 (2024)

    2024 doi

  10. [22]

    Z. Tao, M. Bhati, and J. E. Subotnik, Non-resonant raman optical activity from phase-space electronic structure theory, APL Computational Physics2, 10.1063/5.0315696 (2026)

    2026 doi

  11. [23]

    L. Peng, T. Qiu, N. Bradbury, X. Bian, M. Bhati, R. Littlejohn, N. M. Kidwell, and J. E. Subotnik, Phase space electronic structure theory: From di- atomic lambda-doubling to macroscopic einstein–de haas, The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters17, 2799–2811 (2026)

    2026

  12. [24]

    L. Peng, T. Duston, N. Bradbury, M. Bhati, X. Tao, M. Rosen, and J. E. Subotnik, A conceptual shift in our understanding of degenerate radical spin sys- tems: Spin-rotation coupling turned on its head (2026), arXiv:2603.13211

    2026

  13. [25]

    Baroni, S

    S. Baroni, S. de Gironcoli, A. Dal Corso, and P. Giannozzi, Phonons and related crystal prop- erties from density-functional perturbation theory, Reviews of Modern Physics73, 515–562 (2001)

    2001

  14. [26]

    Frenkel and B

    D. Frenkel and B. Smit,Understanding Molecular Simulation: From Algorithms to Applications(Aca- demic Press, 2023)

    2023

  15. [27]

    Vanderbilt,Berry Phases in Electronic Structure Theory: Electric Polarization, Orbital Magnetiza- tion and Topological Insulators(Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 2018)

    D. Vanderbilt,Berry Phases in Electronic Structure Theory: Electric Polarization, Orbital Magnetiza- tion and Topological Insulators(Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 2018)

    2018

  16. [28]

    Resta, Molecular berry curvatures and the adi- abatic response tensors, The Journal of Chemical Physics158, 10.1063/5.0135923 (2023)

    R. Resta, Molecular berry curvatures and the adi- abatic response tensors, The Journal of Chemical Physics158, 10.1063/5.0135923 (2023)

    2023 doi

  17. [29]

    Sundaram and Q

    G. Sundaram and Q. Niu, Wave-packet dynam- ics in slowly perturbed crystals: Gradient correc- tions and berry-phase effects, Physical Review B59, 14915–14925 (1999)

    1999

  18. [30]

    Xiao, M.-C

    D. Xiao, M.-C. Chang, and Q. Niu, Berry phase effects on electronic properties, Reviews of Modern Physics82, 1959–2007 (2010)

    2010

  19. [31]

    L. A. Nafie, Adiabatic molecular properties be- yond the born–oppenheimer approximation. com- plete adiabatic wave functions and vibrationally in- duced electronic current density, The Journal of Chemical Physics79, 4950–4957 (1983)

    1983

  20. [33]

    Path 1:Wigner Transform then Change Coordinates The Wigner transform of ˆOis: OW (x,p) = Z d∆ x+ ∆ 2 ˆO x− ∆ 2 eip·∆ (3) Thereafter, if switch to (r,π) coordinates, we find: ˜OW (r,π) =O W K −1r, KT p (4) = Z d∆ K −1r+ ∆ 2 ˆO K −1r− ∆ 2 ei(K T π)·∆ (5)

  21. [34]

    Path 2: Change Coordinates then Wigner Transform The alternative is to change coordinates first: D r ˜ˆO r′ E = D K −1r ˆO K −1r′ E 1 |det(K −1)| (6) ∗ nadinebradbury@princeton.edu † subotnik@princeton.edu 2 The determinant factor arises whenever one changes coordinates as see...

  22. [35]

    monochromatic

    no longer holds: ψnk(r±a i)̸=e ±ik·ai ψnk(r) (25) That being said, the decomposition in Eq. 18 is still a valid ansatz as theu nk can be extended by continuity. However, the difference is that now theu nk(r) functions are not periodic over the unit cell: unk(r±a i)̸=u nk(r) (2...

  23. [36]

    Evaluation of the LHS The left hand side of Eq. 93 is a known quantity within the broader field of quantum geometry.⟨r⟩can be calculated through a Berry phase, which becomes an integral over the Brillouin zone of the Berry connection. In other words, we will replace ˆr→ie ik·r...

  24. [37]

    93, we require a Hamiltonian parametrized by bothQandΠin the spirit of Shenvi’s approach

    Evaluation of the RHS To evaluate the right hand side of Eq. 93, we require a Hamiltonian parametrized by bothQandΠin the spirit of Shenvi’s approach. This Hamiltonian is clearly given by ˆH ′ W in Eq. 44, which satisfies (forn̸=m): ∂H ′ W ∂ΠA,−q nk′,mk Π=0 = ΠAq MA nk′,mk − i...

  25. [38]

    −iℏ X Aℓ ∇RAℓ + ˆp, ˆΓAq # =

    Translational Invariance within Nafie’s equality Atq= 0, there is an additional symmetry worth noting: X A ∂⟨ˆr⟩q=0 ∂QA,q=0 = 0.(131) Eq. 131 can be proven by evoking the sum-rule symmetry of the derivative couplings atq= 0 (Eq. 74) and Nafie’s relationship that appears in Eq....

  26. [39]

    Baroni, S

    S. Baroni, S. de Gironcoli, A. Dal Corso, and P. Giannozzi, Phonons and related crystal properties from density- functional perturbation theory, Reviews of Modern Physics73, 515–562 (2001)

    2001

  27. [40]

    T. Qin, J. Zhou, and J. Shi, Berry curvature and the phonon hall effect, Physical Review B86, 10.1103/phys- revb.86.104305 (2012)

    2012 doi

  28. [41]

    Komiyama and S

    H. Komiyama and S. Murakami, Universal features of canonical phonon angular momentum without time-reversal symmetry, Physical Review B103, 10.1103/physrevb.103.214302 (2021)

    2021 doi

  29. [42]

    Bonini, S

    J. Bonini, S. Ren, D. Vanderbilt, M. Stengel, C. E. Dreyer, and S. Coh, Frequency splitting of chiral phonons from broken time-reversal symmetry in CrI 3, Physical Review Letters130, 10.1103/physrevlett.130.086701 (2023)

    2023 doi

  30. [43]

    E. I. Tellgren, T. Culpitt, L. D. M. Peters, and T. Helgaker, Molecular vibrations in the presence of velocity- dependent forces, The Journal of Chemical Physics158, 10.1063/5.0139684 (2023)

    2023 doi

  31. [44]

    Frenkel and B

    D. Frenkel and B. Smit,Understanding Molecular Simulation: From Algorithms to Applications(Academic Press, 2023). 18

    2023

  32. [45]

    L. A. Nafie, Adiabatic molecular properties beyond the born–oppenheimer approximation. complete adiabatic wave functions and vibrationally induced electronic current density, The Journal of Chemical Physics79, 4950–4957 (1983)

    1983

  33. [46]

    Shenvi, Phase-space surface hopping: Nonadiabatic dynamics in a superadiabatic basis, J

    N. Shenvi, Phase-space surface hopping: Nonadiabatic dynamics in a superadiabatic basis, J. Comp. Phys.130, 124117 (2009)

    2009

  34. [47]

    Stengel, M

    M. Stengel, M. Royo, and E. Artacho, Rototranslational sum rules for nuclear dynamics via traveling pseudopo- tentials, Physical Review Letters136, 10.1103/sdwb-qxrp (2026)

    2026 doi

  35. [48]

    X. Bian, T. Duston, N. Bradbury, Z. Tao, M. Bhati, T. Qiu, X. Wu, Y. Wu, and J. E. Subotnik, The phase- space way to electronic structure theory and subsequently chemical dynamics, Chemical Physics Reviews7, 10.1063/5.0286240 (2026)

    2026 doi

  36. [49]

    Helbig, J

    N. Helbig, J. I. Fuks, M. Casula, M. J. Verstraete, M. A. L. Marques, I. V. Tokatly, and A. Rubio, Density functional theory beyond the linear regime: Validating an adiabatic local density approximation, Physical Review A83, 10.1103/physreva.83.032503 (2011)

    2011 doi

  37. [50]

    L. O. Wagner, E. M. Stoudenmire, K. Burke, and S. R. White, Reference electronic structure calculations in one dimension, Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics14, 8581 (2012)

    2012

  38. [51]

    T. E. Baker, E. M. Stoudenmire, L. O. Wagner, K. Burke, and S. R. White, One-dimensional mimicking of electronic structure: The case for exponentials, Physical Review B91, 10.1103/physrevb.91.235141 (2015)

    2015 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.