Comparison of the multi-layer multi-configuration time-dependent Hartree (ML-MCTDH) method and the density matrix renormalization group (DMRG) for ground state properties of linear rotor chains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We demonstrate the applicability of the Multi-Layer Multi-Configuration Time-Dependent Hartree (ML-MCTDH) method to the problem of computing ground states of one-dimensional chains of linear rotors with dipolar interactions. Specifically, we successfully obtain energies, entanglement entropies, and orientational correlations that are in agreement with the Density Matrix Renormalization Group (DMRG), which has been previously used for this system. We find that the entropies calculated by ML-MCTDH for larger system sizes contain nonmonotonicity, as expected in the vicinity of a second-order quantum phase transition between ordered and disordered rotor states. We observe that this effect remains when all couplings besides nearest-neighbor are omitted from the Hamiltonian, which suggests that it is not sensitive to the rate of decay of the interactions. In contrast to DMRG, which is tailored to the one-dimensional case, ML-MCTDH (as implemented in the Heidelberg MCTDH package) requires more computational time and memory, although the requirements are still within reach of commodity hardware. The numerical convergence and computational demand of two practical implementations of ML-MCTDH and DMRG are presented in detail for various combinations of system parameters.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".