Algorithmic approach to diagrammatic expansions for real-frequency evaluation of susceptibility functions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We systematically generate the perturbative expansion for the two-particle spin susceptibility in the Feynman diagrammatic formalism and apply this expansion to a model system---the single-band Hubbard model on a square lattice. We make use of algorithmic Matsubara integration (AMI) [A. Taheridehkordi, S. H. Curnoe, and J. P. F. LeBlanc, Phys. Rev. B 99, 035120 (2019)] to analytically evaluate Matsubara frequency summations, allowing us to symbolically impose analytic continuation to the real-frequency axis. We minimize our computational expense by applying graph invariant transformations [A. Taheridehkordi, S. H. Curnoe, and J. P. F. LeBlanc, Phys. Rev. B 101, 125109 (2020)]. We highlight extensions of the random-phase approximation and T-matrix methods that, due to AMI, become tractable. We present results for weak interaction strength where the direct perturbative expansion is convergent, and verify our results on the Matsubara axis by comparison to other numerical methods. By examining the spin susceptibility as a function of real frequency via an order-by-order expansion, we can identify precisely what role higher-order corrections play on spin susceptibility and demonstrate the utility and limitations of our approach.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".