Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 84 references

Accurate and thermodynamically consistent hydrogen equation of state for planetary modeling with flow matching

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Flow matching fixes the hydrogen equation of state for Jupiter models

desk verdict Serious paper with a real diagnostic (REOS3 loop inconsistency) and a promising EOS construction protocol, but the flow-matching benchmark needs more than two tight pairs to support the 'conclusive' adiabat claim. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.10594 v2 pith:YICZ2SGR submitted 2025-01-17 astro-ph.EP cond-mat.mtrl-scics.LGphysics.comp-ph

Hao Xie , Saburo Howard , Guglielmo Mazzola This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EPcond-mat.mtrl-scics.LGphysics.comp-ph
keywords hydrogenequationofstateJupiterinteriormodelingthermodynamicintegrationflowmatchingentropycalculationdenseabinitiomoleculardynamicsREOS3
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 claims that the long-standing disagreement between two standard ab initio hydrogen equations of state used for Jupiter modeling does not come from the underlying density functional theory but from a thermodynamically inconsistent entropy calculation in REOS3. It establishes this by benchmarking the usual entropy method, thermodynamic integration, against a recently developed flow-matching free energy estimator, and then constructing a new equation of state that is consistent across the ab initio and chemical-model regions. If right, planetary modelers can adopt one reliable hydrogen EOS and stop treating the REOS3/MH13 adiabat spread as a fundamental error bar.

What carries the argument

The central objects are targeted free energy perturbation (TFEP) estimators that connect two state points through an invertible configuration-space map, and the flow-matching technique that trains such maps as normalizing flows with a velocity-field objective. These provide independent free energy differences that need no interpolation path, making them a benchmark for thermodynamic integration. The EOS construction then uses per-region free energy interpolation: within each region of a single theory, TI is applied separately, the resulting free energies are spline-interpolated, and the regions are glued by interpolating along the boundary; consistency is diagnosed by computing the line integral of d(F/T) around closed local loops of the tabular data, which should vanish for a true free energy.

What would settle it

Compute the entropy difference between two adjacent grid points, such as T = 3000 K, ρ = 0.5 g/cm3 and ρ = 0.55 g/cm3, using an independent, statistically exact method such as long coupled-electron-ion Monte Carlo runs, and check whether the flow matching average agrees with it within error bars; a significant bias at even one such pair would weaken the claim that thermodynamic integration is accurate on the discrete grid.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

At the DFT-PBE level of theory, the discrepancy between the Jupiter adiabats derived from REOS3 and from MH13 is traced to a single source: the REOS3 entropy was obtained by one thermodynamic integration over the entire phase diagram, stitching together regions described by different theories, and that global integration is not everywhere thermodynamically consistent. The paper demonstrates that thermodynamic integration itself is accurate when applied on a discrete DFT-MD grid with spacings of about 1000 K in temperature and 0.1 g/cm3 in density, so the error is not the discretization but the inconsistent joining of the ab initio region with the low-density chemical model. A new EOS built by integrating each theory region separately and then interpolating the resulting free energy function removes the inconsistency, as shown by near-zero loop integrals of d(F/T) and yields a cooler Jupiter adiabat that agrees closely with MH13 at high pressure.

Load-bearing premise

The benchmark assumes the flow matching free energy estimator is unbiased at every grid point, but only one pair of states is shown to have tight forward and reverse bounds, and the absolute reference state carries a 0.2% relative error.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The Jupiter adiabat from the new EOS is cooler than the REOS3-based one at high pressure and close to the MH13 prediction, implying a higher likelihood of hydrogen-helium phase separation and helium rain in Jupiter's deep interior.
  • Thermodynamic integration on a grid with 1000 K and 0.1 g/cm3 spacings is accurate, so the much costlier coupling-constant integration is not necessary for dense hydrogen entropy over this region.
  • The quality of the interpolation between the DFT-MD data and the SCvH chemical model acts as a sensitive detector of absolute entropy errors, identifying the proton-spin entropy constant kB ln 2/mp that must be subtracted from SCvH.
  • The new hydrogen EOS spans roughly 1 bar to 700 GPa and provides a thermodynamically consistent input for future planetary structure models calibrated against Juno and Galileo data.
  • The approach is generic: the same flow-matching benchmark and per-region free energy interpolation can be applied to other materials where entropy disagreements affect planetary modeling.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural extension is to apply the same loop-integral consistency check to multi-theory EOSs for helium, water, or hydrogen-water mixtures, where hidden entropy offsets could likewise distort mixture models.
  • If the averaged flow-matching estimator were later shown to be biased at some grid points, the conclusion that TI is accurate on the discrete grid would need revision; extending the tight-bound demonstration beyond one representative state pair would harden the benchmark.
  • The paper's protocol suggests that entropy, rather than pressure or energy, should be treated as the primary field to be matched across EOS regions, since entropy mismatches are what propagate into planetary adiabats.
  • The 0.0057 MJ/kg/K proton-spin shift, discovered through interpolation quality rather than imposed a priori, illustrates how boundary smoothness can serve as a thermodynamically informed probe of absolute entropy calibration.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops a flow-matching-based method to compute free-energy differences in ab initio DFT-MD simulations of dense hydrogen and uses it to benchmark the accuracy of thermodynamic integration (TI) on a discrete temperature-density grid. The authors then identify a thermodynamic inconsistency in the REOS3 tabulated EOS by evaluating loop integrals of d(F/T), construct a new hydrogen EOS by performing TI separately in the DFT and SCvH regions and interpolating the resulting free energies, and show that the Jupiter adiabat from this new EOS is cooler at high pressure and closer to MH13 than to REOS3. The central claim is that the long-standing REOS3-MH13 discrepancy in Jupiter models primarily stems from a thermodynamically inconsistent TI calculation in REOS3, not from intrinsic limitations of TI on a finite grid.

Significance. The paper introduces a useful independent cross-check of TI using flow matching, avoiding manual interpolation between state points, and proposes a loop-integral diagnostic for thermodynamic consistency of tabular EOS data. The construction protocol, based on separate TI per region followed by free-energy interpolation, is a sensible way to localize interpolation errors and could be applied to other materials. The resulting adiabat comparison with REOS3 and MH13 addresses an important open problem in planetary modeling. However, the quantitative strength of the central claim depends on error estimates and fitting choices that are not fully reported: forward/reverse flow-matching bounds are shown to be tight only at two state pairs, no uncertainties are attached to the REOS3 loop integrals, and an extra ad hoc entropy offset is used in the final EOS construction.

major comments (3)
  1. [Supplemental Material, 'Flow matching' and 'Illustrative examples of the results']
  2. [Supplemental Material, 'More details on the thermodynamically consistent construction of our EOS']
  3. [Main text, 'Benchmarking thermodynamic integration' and Fig. 2; Supplemental Material, Fig. S5]
minor comments (5)
  1. [Main text, Fig. 3]
  2. [Main text, Fig. 1 and Fig. 3]
  3. [Summary and Outlook]
  4. [Supplemental Material, 'Illustrative examples of the results']
  5. [Main text, 'Thermodynamically consistent construction']

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the REOS3 inconsistency diagnosis rests on internal loop integrals plus an independent flow-matching benchmark, and the new EOS consistency is an openly stated design property rather than a claimed empirical prediction.

full rationale

I walked the derivation chain and found no step in which a prediction reduces to its own inputs by construction or by load-bearing self-citation. The central claim that REOS3's global thermodynamic integration is path-dependent is established directly from REOS3's own tabular data: the non-vanishing loop integrals H d(F/T) in Fig. 2 and the diverging isotherm-first vs isochore-first entropies in Fig. S5 are mathematical consequences of the tabulated inconsistency, not of the authors' new EOS. The physical anchor for which entropy is correct is the flow-matching/TFEP calculation, an estimator that uses only end-state samples and transformations (Eqs. 2-3, S4-S5) and is therefore methodologically independent of the thermodynamic-integration path being benchmarked. The reference-state absolute entropy is also checked against independent CEIMC results. The thermodynamic consistency of the final EOS is admittedly built in: the paper states that pressure and energy are obtained by taking partial derivatives of a splined free energy, so the small loop integrals of the final EOS are a verification of the construction, not an empirical discovery; this is disclosed rather than disguised. Two caveats are worth noting but are correctness risks, not circularity: the flow-matching final free energies are obtained by arithmetic averaging of forward and reverse TFEP bounds, with tightness demonstrated for only one representative state pair plus the reference state; and a small 0.001 MJ/kg/K entropy offset is added on the DFT side to improve boundary interpolation. The latter is a fitted constant, is disclosed in the Supplemental Material, and does not control the high-pressure ab initio region where the Jupiter adiabat comparison with MH13 is made. Self-citations (e.g., refs. [1], [46], [58], [59]) appear only in background and methodology context and are not load-bearing for the paper's conclusions. Overall, the derivation is self-contained and the identified limitations do not amount to circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. Its free parameters are the entropy and energy offsets, the interpolation boundaries, and the reference point used to anchor absolute entropy. The most important axioms are classical protons, DFT-PBE accuracy, unbiasedness of flow matching estimators, and the validity of linear mixing in the adiabat calculation.

free parameters (4)
  • DFT-side entropy offset = +0.001 MJ/kg/K
    Added to the DFT-MD entropy to make the SCvH/DFT interpolation look smoother; documented in the Supplemental Material as an extra small offset not derived from first principles.
  • DFT energy baseline offset = not stated
    Global shift of DFT absolute energies chosen to connect free energy isotherms across the interpolation boundary; the paper states that the absolute energy of DFT is arbitrary and an offset is selected for smoothness.
  • Density boundaries for interpolation = 0.1 and 0.3 g/cm3
    Choice of where to switch from SCvH to DFT-MD and how wide to make the interpolation gap; the paper describes this as a trade-off based on confidence in the two theories.
  • Reference state for absolute entropy = T=5000 K, rho=1.4 g/cm3
    Absolute entropy is computed only at this point and shifted elsewhere; the point was chosen where a CEIMC comparison value exists, so the match to Morales et al. is partly a favorable comparison.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption DFT-PBE describes the relevant electronic structure of dense hydrogen accurately enough for entropy and pressure purposes.
    Invoked throughout the paper; the authors explicitly restrict their claims to the DFT-PBE level of theory.
  • domain assumption Protons behave classically and nuclear quantum effects are negligible at T >= 3000 K.
    Stated in the Supplemental Material: 'the nuclear quantum effect may also have a slight impact on the ab initio entropy at low temperatures, which has been ignored in this work.'
  • domain assumption Flow matching velocity field training achieves sufficient overlap between transformed distributions so that averaging forward and reverse TFEP bounds is unbiased.
    Used to benchmark TI; only one illustrative state pair and the reference state error analysis are shown in the supplement.
  • domain assumption The REOS3 tabular data used for the loop-integral test faithfully represent the published EOS.
    The inconsistency test is performed on data from the REOS3 publication and the authors' own TI reproduction.
  • domain assumption Linear mixing of hydrogen and helium entropies is adequate for the Jupiter adiabat.
    Used in the adiabat calculation; the authors note that MH13 does not rely on this approximation.
  • domain assumption SCvH EOS is accurate in the low-density molecular region.
    Used as the low-density part of the final EOS.
  • ad hoc to paper The interpolation quality between SCvH and DFT data is a reliable detector of entropy offsets.
    The 'self-correcting' protocol relies on this; since the extra DFT offset is fit to make the interpolation smooth, using smoothness as evidence of correctness has circular content.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Accurate and thermodynamically consistent hydrogen equation of state for planetary modeling with flow matching." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YICZ2SGR

@misc{pith2026250110594,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Accurate and thermodynamically consistent hydrogen equation of state for planetary modeling with flow matching},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YICZ2SGR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.10594}
}
read the original abstract

Accurate determination of the equation of state of dense hydrogen is essential for understanding gas giants. Currently, there is still no consensus on methods for calculating its entropy, which play a fundamental role and can result in qualitatively different predictions for Jupiter's interior. Here, we investigate various aspects of entropy calculation for dense hydrogen based on ab initio molecular dynamics simulations. Specifically, we employ the recently developed flow matching method to validate the accuracy of the traditional thermodynamic integration approach. We then clearly identify pitfalls in previous attempts and propose a reliable framework for constructing the hydrogen equation of state, which is accurate and thermodynamically consistent across a wide range of temperature and pressure conditions. This allows us to conclusively address the long-standing discrepancies in Jupiter's adiabat among earlier studies, demonstrating the potential of our approach for providing reliable equations of state of diverse materials.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.10594 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. shows our results (solid line) for several isotherms of the specific entropy s and pressure p, together with two widely used hydrogen EOSs in past literature: CMS19 [11] (dotted line) and REOS3 [14] (dashed line). For convenience, we also include an error bar of absolute entropy at the ref￾erence point and the CEIMC entropy of Morales et al. [19] (dash-dotted line) at relatively high densities. Note that the REOS3 e… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. The line integral [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. Jupiter’s adiabats obtained from di [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Several (a) specific entropy, (b) specific energy, (c) specific [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

84 extracted references · 78 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Un- derstanding dense hydrogen at planetary conditions,

    Ravit Helled, Guglielmo Mazzola, and Ronald Redmer, “Un- derstanding dense hydrogen at planetary conditions,” Nature Reviews Physics 2, 562–574 (2020)

    2020

  2. [2]

    Space science reviews volume on Galileo Mission overview,

    T. V . Johnson, C. M. Yeates, and R. Young, “Space science reviews volume on Galileo Mission overview,” Space Science Reviews 60, 3–21 (1992)

    1992

  3. [3]

    The Juno Mission,

    S. J. Bolton, J. Lunine, D. Stevenson, J. E. P. Connerney, S. Levin, T. C. Owen, F. Bagenal, D. Gautier, A. P. Ingersoll, G. S. Orton, T. Guillot, W. Hubbard, J. Bloxham, A. Coradini, S. K. Stephens, P. Mokashi, R. Thorne, and R. Thorpe, “The Juno Mission,” Space Science Reviews 213, 5–37 (2017)

    2017

  4. [4]

    Jupiter internal struc- ture: the effect of different equations of state,

    Miguel, Y ., Guillot, T., and Fayon, L., “Jupiter internal struc- ture: the effect of different equations of state,” A&A596, A114 (2016)

    2016

  5. [5]

    New Models of Jupiter in the Context of Juno and Galileo,

    Florian Debras and Gilles Chabrier, “New Models of Jupiter in the Context of Juno and Galileo,” The Astrophysical Journal 872, 100 (2019)

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Benchmarking the ab initio hydrogen equation of state for the interior structure of jupiter,

    Mazevet, S., Licari, A., and Soubiran, F., “Benchmarking the ab initio hydrogen equation of state for the interior structure of jupiter,” A&A 664, A112 (2022)

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    Jupiter’s inte- rior from Juno: Equation-of-state uncertainties and dilute core extent,

    Howard, S., Guillot, T., Bazot, M., Miguel, Y ., Stevenson, D. J., Galanti, E., Kaspi, Y ., Hubbard, W. B., Militzer, B., Helled, R., Nettelmann, N., Idini, B., and Bolton, S., “Jupiter’s inte- rior from Juno: Equation-of-state uncertainties and dilute core extent,” A&A 672, A33 (2023)

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Theory of Figures to the Seventh Order and the Interiors of Jupiter and Saturn,

    N. Nettelmann, N. Movshovitz, D. Ni, J. J. Fortney, E. Galanti, Y . Kaspi, R. Helled, C. R. Mankovich, and S. Bolton, “Theory of Figures to the Seventh Order and the Interiors of Jupiter and Saturn,” The Planetary Science Journal 2, 241 (2021)

    work page 2021

Show all 84 references
  1. [9]

    Jupiter’s inhomogeneous envelope,

    Miguel, Y ., Bazot, M., Guillot, T., Howard, S., Galanti, E., Kaspi, Y ., Hubbard, W. B., Militzer, B., Helled, R., Atreya, S. K., Connerney, J. E. P., Durante, D., Kulowski, L., Lunine, J. I., Stevenson, D., and Bolton, S., “Jupiter’s inhomogeneous envelope,” A&A662, A18 (2022)

    2022

  2. [10]

    Juno Spacecraft Measurements of Jupiter’s Gravity Imply a Dilute Core,

    Burkhard Militzer, William B. Hubbard, Sean Wahl, Jonathan I. Lunine, Eli Galanti, Yohai Kaspi, Yamila Miguel, Tristan Guil- lot, Kimberly M. Moore, Marzia Parisi, John E. P. Conner- ney, Ravid Helled, Hao Cao, Christopher Mankovich, David J. Stevenson, Ryan S. Park, Mike Wong...

    2022

  3. [11]

    A new equation of state for dense hydrogen–helium mixtures,

    G. Chabrier, S. Mazevet, and F. Soubiran, “A new equation of state for dense hydrogen–helium mixtures,” The Astrophysical Journal 872, 51 (2019)

    2019

  4. [12]

    Ab initio equation of state for hydrogen–helium mixtures with recalibration of the giant- planet mass–radius relation,

    B. Militzer and W. B. Hubbard, “Ab initio equation of state for hydrogen–helium mixtures with recalibration of the giant- planet mass–radius relation,” The Astrophysical Journal 774, 148 (2013)

    2013

  5. [13]

    Jupiter models with improved ab initio hydrogen equation of state (h- reos.2),

    N. Nettelmann, A. Becker, B. Holst, and R. Redmer, “Jupiter models with improved ab initio hydrogen equation of state (h- reos.2),” The Astrophysical Journal 750, 52 (2012)

    2012

  6. [14]

    Ab initio equations of state for hydrogen (h-reos.3) and helium (he- reos.3) and their implications for the interior of brown dwarfs,

    Andreas Becker, Winfried Lorenzen, Jonathan J. Fortney, Na- dine Nettelmann, Manuel Sch ¨ottler, and Ronald Redmer, “Ab initio equations of state for hydrogen (h-reos.3) and helium (he- reos.3) and their implications for the interior of brown dwarfs,” The Astrophysical Journal...

    2014

  7. [15]

    Gen- eralized gradient approximation made simple,

    John P. Perdew, Kieron Burke, and Matthias Ernzerhof, “Gen- eralized gradient approximation made simple,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865–3868 (1996)

    1996

  8. [16]

    Statistical Mechanics of Fluid Mixtures,

    John G. Kirkwood, “Statistical Mechanics of Fluid Mixtures,” The Journal of Chemical Physics 3, 300–313 (1935)

    1935

  9. [17]

    First- order phase transitions by first-principles free-energy calcula- tions: The melting of al,

    Gilles A. de Wijs, Georg Kresse, and Michael J. Gillan, “First- order phase transitions by first-principles free-energy calcula- tions: The melting of al,” Phys. Rev. B 57, 8223–8234 (1998)

    1998

  10. [18]

    Frenkel and B

    D. Frenkel and B. Smit, Understanding Molecular Simulation: From Algorithms to Applications , 3rd ed. (Academic Press, 2023)

    2023

  11. [19]

    Equation of state of metallic hydrogen from coupled electron- ion monte carlo simulations,

    Miguel A. Morales, Carlo Pierleoni, and D. M. Ceperley, “Equation of state of metallic hydrogen from coupled electron- ion monte carlo simulations,” Phys. Rev. E81, 021202 (2010)

    2010

  12. [20]

    Ab initio calculation of the miscibility diagram for mixtures of hy- drogen and water,

    Armin Bergermann, Martin French, and Ronald Redmer, “Ab initio calculation of the miscibility diagram for mixtures of hy- drogen and water,” Phys. Rev. B109, 174107 (2024)

    2024

  13. [21]

    An Equation 6 of State for Low-Mass Stars and Giant Planets,

    D. Saumon, G. Chabrier, and H. M. van Horn, “An Equation 6 of State for Low-Mass Stars and Giant Planets,” Astrophysical Journal Supplement 99, 713 (1995)

    1995

  14. [22]

    Jupiter internal struc- ture: the e ffect of di fferent equations of state (corrigendum),

    Miguel, Y ., Guillot, T., and Fayon, L., “Jupiter internal struc- ture: the e ffect of di fferent equations of state (corrigendum),” A&A 618, C2 (2018)

    2018

  15. [23]

    Building normalizing flows with stochastic interpolants,

    Michael Samuel Albergo and Eric Vanden-Eijnden, “Building normalizing flows with stochastic interpolants,” inThe Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations (2023)

    2023

  16. [24]

    Flow matching for generative mod- eling,

    Yaron Lipman, Ricky T. Q. Chen, Heli Ben-Hamu, Maximilian Nickel, and Matthew Le, “Flow matching for generative mod- eling,” in The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations (2023)

    2023

  17. [25]

    Flow straight and fast: Learning to generate and transfer data with rectified flow,

    Xingchao Liu, Chengyue Gong, and qiang liu, “Flow straight and fast: Learning to generate and transfer data with rectified flow,” in The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations (2023)

    2023

  18. [26]

    Targeted free energy perturbation,

    C. Jarzynski, “Targeted free energy perturbation,” Phys. Rev. E 65, 046122 (2002)

    2002

  19. [27]

    Using bijective maps to improve free-energy estimates,

    A. M. Hahn and H. Then, “Using bijective maps to improve free-energy estimates,” Phys. Rev. E79, 011113 (2009)

    2009

  20. [28]

    See Supplemental Material for more details on the theoreti- cal formulations of targeted free energy perturbation and flow matching, as well as their implementation and some illustrative examples in practice. There are also further discussions about the effects of thermodynami...

  21. [29]

    Normalizing flows for probabilistic modeling and inference,

    George Papamakarios, Eric Nalisnick, Danilo Jimenez Rezende, Shakir Mohamed, and Balaji Lakshminarayanan, “Normalizing flows for probabilistic modeling and inference,” Journal of Machine Learning Research 22, 1–64 (2021)

    2021

  22. [30]

    Bounding free energy di fference with flow matching,

    Lu Zhao and Lei Wang, “Bounding free energy di fference with flow matching,” Chinese Physics Letters 40, 120201 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    First- order liquid-liquid phase transition in dense hydrogen,

    Winfried Lorenzen, Bastian Holst, and Ronald Redmer, “First- order liquid-liquid phase transition in dense hydrogen,” Phys. Rev. B 82, 195107 (2010)

    2010

  24. [32]

    Thermodynamic anomalies and three distinct liquid- liquid transitions in warm dense liquid hydrogen,

    Hua Y . Geng, Q. Wu, Miriam Marqu ´es, and Graeme J. Ack- land, “Thermodynamic anomalies and three distinct liquid- liquid transitions in warm dense liquid hydrogen,” Phys. Rev. B 100, 134109 (2019)

    2019

  25. [33]

    Multiphase equa- tion of state of hydrogen from ab initio calculations in the range 0.2 to 5 g/cc up to 10 ev,

    L. Caillabet, S. Mazevet, and P. Loubeyre, “Multiphase equa- tion of state of hydrogen from ab initio calculations in the range 0.2 to 5 g/cc up to 10 ev,” Phys. Rev. B83, 094101 (2011)

    2011

  26. [34]

    Thermophysical properties of warm dense hydrogen using quantum molecular dynamics simulations,

    Bastian Holst, Ronald Redmer, and Michael P. Desjarlais, “Thermophysical properties of warm dense hydrogen using quantum molecular dynamics simulations,” Phys. Rev. B 77, 184201 (2008)

    2008

  27. [35]

    Fluid variational theory for pressure dissociation in dense hydrogen: Multicomponent reference system and nonadditivity e ffects,

    Hauke Juranek, Ronald Redmer, and Yaakov Rosenfeld, “Fluid variational theory for pressure dissociation in dense hydrogen: Multicomponent reference system and nonadditivity e ffects,” The Journal of Chemical Physics 117, 1768–1774 (2002)

    2002

  28. [36]

    Equation of state for dense hydrogen and plasma phase transition,

    B. Holst, N. Nettelmann, and R. Redmer, “Equation of state for dense hydrogen and plasma phase transition,” Contributions to Plasma Physics 47, 368–374 (2007)

    2007

  29. [37]

    Codata key values for thermodynamics,

    John D Cox, Donald D Wagman, and Vadim Andreevich Medvedev, “Codata key values for thermodynamics,” in Series on Thermodynamic Properties (1989)

    1989

  30. [38]

    Thermophysical properties of fluid systems,

    Eric W. Lemmon, Ian H. Bell, Marcia L. Huber, and Mark O. McLinden, “Thermophysical properties of fluid systems,” in NIST Chemistry WebBook, NIST Standard Reference Database Number 69 , edited by P.J. Linstrom and W.G. Mallard (Na- tional Institute of Standards and Technology,...

    2023

  31. [39]

    Didier Saumon and Gilles Chabrier, private communication

  32. [40]

    Ab initio calculation of the miscibility diagram for hydrogen-helium mixtures,

    Manuel Sch ¨ottler and Ronald Redmer, “Ab initio calculation of the miscibility diagram for hydrogen-helium mixtures,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 115703 (2018)

    2018

  33. [41]

    Hydrogen-helium mixtures in the interiors of giant planets,

    J. V orberger, I. Tamblyn, B. Militzer, and S. A. Bonev, “Hydrogen-helium mixtures in the interiors of giant planets,” Phys. Rev. B 75, 024206 (2007)

    2007

  34. [42]

    Theoretical evidence of h-he demixing under jupiter and saturn conditions,

    Xiaoju Chang, Bo Chen, Qiyu Zeng, Han Wang, Kaiguo Chen, Qunchao Tong, Xiaoxiang Yu, Dongdong Kang, Shen Zhang, Fangyu Guo, Yong Hou, Zengxiu Zhao, Yansun Yao, Yanming Ma, and Jiayu Dai, “Theoretical evidence of h-he demixing under jupiter and saturn conditions,” Nature Commun...

    2024

  35. [43]

    Liquid–liquid phase tran- sition in hydrogen by coupled electron–ion monte carlo simula- tions,

    Carlo Pierleoni, Miguel A. Morales, Giovanni Rillo, Markus Holzmann, and David M. Ceperley, “Liquid–liquid phase tran- sition in hydrogen by coupled electron–ion monte carlo simula- tions,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113, 4953–4957 (2016)

    2016

  36. [44]

    Phase diagram of hydrogen and a hydrogen-helium mixture at plan- etary conditions by quantum monte carlo simulations,

    Guglielmo Mazzola, Ravit Helled, and Sandro Sorella, “Phase diagram of hydrogen and a hydrogen-helium mixture at plan- etary conditions by quantum monte carlo simulations,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 025701 (2018)

    2018

  37. [45]

    TurboRVB: A many-body toolkit for ab initio electronic simulations by quantum Monte Carlo,

    Kousuke Nakano, Claudio Attaccalite, Matteo Barborini, Luca Capriotti, Michele Casula, Emanuele Coccia, Mario Dagrada, Claudio Genovese, Ye Luo, Guglielmo Mazzola, Andrea Zen, and Sandro Sorella, “TurboRVB: A many-body toolkit for ab initio electronic simulations by quantum Mo...

    2020

  38. [46]

    Deep variational free energy approach to dense hydro- gen,

    Hao Xie, Zi-Hang Li, Han Wang, Linfeng Zhang, and Lei Wang, “Deep variational free energy approach to dense hydro- gen,” Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 126501 (2023)

    2023

  39. [47]

    Evidence for a first-order liquid-liquid transition in high-pressure hydrogen from ab initio simulations,

    Miguel A. Morales, Carlo Pierleoni, Eric Schwegler, and D. M. Ceperley, “Evidence for a first-order liquid-liquid transition in high-pressure hydrogen from ab initio simulations,” Proceed- ings of the National Academy of Sciences 107, 12799–12803 (2010)

    2010

  40. [48]

    Stable solid molec- ular hydrogen above 900 k from a machine-learned potential trained with di ffusion quantum monte carlo,

    Hongwei Niu, Yubo Yang, Scott Jensen, Markus Holzmann, Carlo Pierleoni, and David M. Ceperley, “Stable solid molec- ular hydrogen above 900 k from a machine-learned potential trained with di ffusion quantum monte carlo,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 076102 (2023)

    2023

  41. [49]

    Data-driven prediction of complex crystal structures of dense lithium,

    Xiaoyang Wang, Zhenyu Wang, Pengyue Gao, Chengqian Zhang, Jian Lv, Han Wang, Haifeng Liu, Yanchao Wang, and Yanming Ma, “Data-driven prediction of complex crystal structures of dense lithium,” Nature Communications 14, 2924 (2023)

    2023

  42. [50]

    High-Temperature Equation of State by a Perturbation Method. I. Nonpolar Gases,

    Robert W. Zwanzig, “High-Temperature Equation of State by a Perturbation Method. I. Nonpolar Gases,” The Journal of Chemical Physics 22, 1420–1426 (1954)

    1954

  43. [51]

    E fficient estimation of free energy dif- ferences from monte carlo data,

    Charles H Bennett, “E fficient estimation of free energy dif- ferences from monte carlo data,” Journal of Computational Physics 22, 245–268 (1976)

    1976

  44. [52]

    Targeted free energy estimation via learned mappings,

    Peter Wirnsberger, Andrew J. Ballard, George Papamakarios, Stuart Abercrombie, S ´ebastien Racani `ere, Alexander Pritzel, Danilo Jimenez Rezende, and Charles Blundell, “Targeted free energy estimation via learned mappings,” The Journal of Chem- ical Physics 153, 144112 (2020)

    2020

  45. [53]

    Normalizing flows for atomic solids,

    Peter Wirnsberger, George Papamakarios, Borja Ibarz, S´ebastien Racani`ere, Andrew J Ballard, Alexander Pritzel, and Charles Blundell, “Normalizing flows for atomic solids,” Ma- chine Learning: Science and Technology 3, 025009 (2022)

    2022

  46. [54]

    Free energy calculation of crys- talline solids using normalizing flows,

    Rasool Ahmad and Wei Cai, “Free energy calculation of crys- talline solids using normalizing flows,” Modelling and Simula- tion in Materials Science and Engineering 30, 065007 (2022). 7

    2022

  47. [55]

    Active Learning of Boltzmann Samplers and Potential Energies with Quantum Mechanical Accuracy,

    Ana Molina-Taborda, Pilar Cossio, Olga Lopez-Acevedo, and Marylou Gabri ´e, “Active Learning of Boltzmann Samplers and Potential Energies with Quantum Mechanical Accuracy,” Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 20, 8833–8843 (2024)

    2024

  48. [56]

    Neural network renormalization group,

    Shuo-Hui Li and Lei Wang, “Neural network renormalization group,” Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 260601 (2018)

    2018

  49. [57]

    Solving statistical me- chanics using variational autoregressive networks,

    Dian Wu, Lei Wang, and Pan Zhang, “Solving statistical me- chanics using variational autoregressive networks,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 080602 (2019)

    2019

  50. [58]

    Ab-initio study of interacting fermions at finite temperature with neural canonical transformation,

    Hao Xie, Linfeng Zhang, and Lei Wang, “Ab-initio study of interacting fermions at finite temperature with neural canonical transformation,” Journal of Machine Learning1, 38–59 (2022)

    2022

  51. [59]

    m∗ of two- dimensional electron gas: A neural canonical transformation study,

    Hao Xie, Linfeng Zhang, and Lei Wang, “ m∗ of two- dimensional electron gas: A neural canonical transformation study,” SciPost Phys. 14, 154 (2023)

    2023

  52. [60]

    Neural ordinary di fferential equations,

    Ricky T. Q. Chen, Yulia Rubanova, Jesse Bettencourt, and David Duvenaud, “Neural ordinary di fferential equations,” in Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems , NIPS’18 (Curran Associates Inc., Red Hook, NY , USA, 2018) p. 6572–6583

    2018

  53. [61]

    Monge-amp `ere flow for generative modeling,

    Linfeng Zhang, Weinan E, and Lei Wang, “Monge-amp `ere flow for generative modeling,” (2018), arXiv:1809.10188 [cs.LG]

    2018 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Attention is all you need,

    Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Ł ukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polo- sukhin, “Attention is all you need,” inAdvances in Neural Infor- mation Processing Systems, V ol. 30, edited by I. Guyon, U. V on Luxburg, S. Bengio, H. Wall...

    2017

  55. [63]

    Equivariant flows: sampling configurations for multi-body systems with symmet- ric energies,

    Jonas K ¨ohler, Leon Klein, and Frank No ´e, “Equivariant flows: sampling configurations for multi-body systems with symmet- ric energies,” (2019), arXiv:1910.00753 [stat.ML]

    2019 arXiv

  56. [64]

    E(n) equivariant graph neural networks,

    V ´ıctor Garcia Satorras, Emiel Hoogeboom, and Max Welling, “E(n) equivariant graph neural networks,” inProceedings of the 38th International Conference on Machine Learning, Proceed- ings of Machine Learning Research, V ol. 139, edited by Marina Meila and Tong Zhang (PMLR, 202...

    2021

  57. [65]

    Iterative backflow renormalization proce- dure for many-body ground-state wave functions of strongly interacting normal fermi liquids,

    Michele Taddei, Michele Ruggeri, Saverio Moroni, and Markus Holzmann, “Iterative backflow renormalization proce- dure for many-body ground-state wave functions of strongly interacting normal fermi liquids,” Phys. Rev. B 91, 115106 (2015)

    2015

  58. [66]

    Ab initio solution of the many-electron schr¨odinger equation with deep neural networks,

    David Pfau, James S. Spencer, Alexander G. D. G. Matthews, and W. M. C. Foulkes, “Ab initio solution of the many-electron schr¨odinger equation with deep neural networks,” Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033429 (2020)

    2020

  59. [67]

    Neural-network quantum states for pe- riodic systems in continuous space,

    Gabriel Pescia, Jiequn Han, Alessandro Lovato, Jianfeng Lu, and Giuseppe Carleo, “Neural-network quantum states for pe- riodic systems in continuous space,” Phys. Rev. Res.4, 023138 (2022)

    2022

  60. [68]

    Neu- ral network ansatz for periodic wave functions and the homo- geneous electron gas,

    Max Wilson, Saverio Moroni, Markus Holzmann, Nicholas Gao, Filip Wudarski, Tejs Vegge, and Arghya Bhowmik, “Neu- ral network ansatz for periodic wave functions and the homo- geneous electron gas,” Phys. Rev. B107, 235139 (2023)

    2023

  61. [69]

    Dis- covering quantum phase transitions with fermionic neural net- works,

    Gino Cassella, Halvard Sutterud, Sam Azadi, N. D. Drummond, David Pfau, James S. Spencer, and W. M. C. Foulkes, “Dis- covering quantum phase transitions with fermionic neural net- works,” Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 036401 (2023)

    2023

  62. [70]

    Message-passing neural quantum states for the homogeneous electron gas,

    Gabriel Pescia, Jannes Nys, Jane Kim, Alessandro Lovato, and Giuseppe Carleo, “Message-passing neural quantum states for the homogeneous electron gas,” Phys. Rev. B 110, 035108 (2024)

    2024

  63. [71]

    Quan- tum espresso: a modular and open-source software project for quantum simulations of materials,

    Paolo Giannozzi, Stefano Baroni, Nicola Bonini, Matteo Calan- dra, Roberto Car, Carlo Cavazzoni, Davide Ceresoli, Guido L Chiarotti, Matteo Cococcioni, Ismaila Dabo, Andrea Dal Corso, Stefano de Gironcoli, Stefano Fabris, Guido Fratesi, Ralph Gebauer, Uwe Gerstmann, Christos G...

    2009

  64. [72]

    Projector augmented-wave method,

    P. E. Bl ¨ochl, “Projector augmented-wave method,” Phys. Rev. B 50, 17953–17979 (1994)

    1994

  65. [73]

    Special points for brillouin-zone integrations,

    Hendrik J. Monkhorst and James D. Pack, “Special points for brillouin-zone integrations,” Phys. Rev. B 13, 5188–5192 (1976)

    1976

  66. [74]

    Canonical sampling through velocity rescaling,

    Giovanni Bussi, Davide Donadio, and Michele Parrinello, “Canonical sampling through velocity rescaling,” The Journal of Chemical Physics 126, 014101 (2007)

    2007

  67. [75]

    Flow matching on gen- eral geometries,

    Ricky T. Q. Chen and Yaron Lipman, “Flow matching on gen- eral geometries,” in The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations (2024)

    2024

  68. [76]

    Equivariant flow matching,

    Leon Klein, Andreas Kr ¨amer, and Frank Noe, “Equivariant flow matching,” in Thirty-seventh Conference on Neural Infor- mation Processing Systems (2023)

    2023

  69. [77]

    The hungarian method for the assignment prob- lem,

    H. W. Kuhn, “The hungarian method for the assignment prob- lem,” Naval Research Logistics Quarterly 2, 83–97 (1955)

    1955

  70. [78]

    Fluid hydrogen at high density: Pressure dissociation,

    Didier Saumon and Gilles Chabrier, “Fluid hydrogen at high density: Pressure dissociation,” Phys. Rev. A 44, 5122–5141 (1991)

    1991

  71. [79]

    Equation of state calculations of hydrogen- helium mixtures in solar and extrasolar giant planets,

    Burkhard Militzer, “Equation of state calculations of hydrogen- helium mixtures in solar and extrasolar giant planets,” Phys. Rev. B 87, 014202 (2013)

    2013

  72. [80]

    Isentropic compression of hydrogen: Probing conditions deep in planetary interiors,

    Andreas Becker, Nadine Nettelmann, Bastian Holst, and Ronald Redmer, “Isentropic compression of hydrogen: Probing conditions deep in planetary interiors,” Phys. Rev. B88, 045122 (2013)

    2013

  73. [81]

    Nuclear quantum e ffects and nonlocal exchange-correlation functionals applied to liquid hydrogen at high pressure,

    Miguel A. Morales, Jeffrey M. McMahon, Carlo Pierleoni, and David M. Ceperley, “Nuclear quantum e ffects and nonlocal exchange-correlation functionals applied to liquid hydrogen at high pressure,” Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 065702 (2013)

    2013

  74. [82]

    Equation of state of fully ionized electron-ion plasmas,

    Gilles Chabrier and Alexander Y . Potekhin, “Equation of state of fully ionized electron-ion plasmas,” Phys. Rev. E 58, 4941– 4949 (1998)

    1998

  75. [83]

    Path integral monte carlo cal- culation of the deuterium hugoniot,

    B. Militzer and D. M. Ceperley, “Path integral monte carlo cal- culation of the deuterium hugoniot,” Phys. Rev. Lett.85, 1890– 1893 (2000)

    2000

  76. [84]

    Path integral monte carlo sim- ulation of the low-density hydrogen plasma,

    B. Militzer and D. M. Ceperley, “Path integral monte carlo sim- ulation of the low-density hydrogen plasma,” Phys. Rev. E 63, 066404 (2001). 8 SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL Consider a hydrogen system composed of N protons and N electrons in a periodic box of volume L3. By introducing ...

    2001

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.