Foundation for the ΔSCF Approach in Density Functional Theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We extend ground-state density-functional theory to excited states and provide the theoretical formulation for the widely used $ΔSCF$ method for calculating excited-state energies and densities. As the electron density alone is insufficient to characterize excited states, we formulate excited-state theory using the defining variables of a noninteracting reference system, namely (1) the excitation quantum number $n_{s}$ and the potential $w_{s}(\mathbf{r})$ (excited-state potential-functional theory, $n$PFT), (2) the noninteracting wavefunction $Φ$ ($Φ$-functional theory, $Φ$FT), or (3) the noninteracting one-electron reduced density matrix $γ_{s}(\mathbf{r},\mathbf{r}')$ (density-matrix-functional theory, $γ_{s}$FT). We show the equivalence of these three sets of variables and their corresponding energy functionals. Importantly, the ground and excited-state exchange-correlation energy use the \textit{same} universal functional, regardless of whether $\left(n_{s},w_{s}(\boldsymbol{r})\right)$, $Φ$, or $γ_{s}(\mathbf{r},\mathbf{r}')$ is selected as the fundamental descriptor of the system. We derive the excited-state (generalized) Kohn-Sham equations. The minimum of all three functionals is the ground-state energy and, for ground states, they are all equivalent to the Hohenberg-Kohn-Sham method. The other stationary points of the functionals provide the excited-state energies and electron densities, establishing the foundation for the $ΔSCF$ method.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".