Connections between Richardson-Gaudin States, Perfect-Pairing, and Pair Coupled-Cluster Theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Slater determinants underpin most electronic structure methods, but orbital-based approaches often struggle to describe strong correlation efficiently. Geminal-based theories, by contrast, naturally capture static correlation in bond-breaking and multireference problems, though at the expense of implementation complexity and limited treatment of dynamic effects. In this work, we examine the interplay between orbital and geminal frameworks, focusing on perfect-pairing (PP) wavefunctions and their relation to pair coupled-cluster doubles (pCCD) and Richardson-Gaudin (RG) states. We show that PP arises as an eigenvector of a simplified reduced Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer (BCS) Hamiltonian expressed in bonding/antibonding orbital pairs, with the complementary eigenvectors enabling a systematic treatment of weak correlation. Second-order Epstein-Nesbet perturbation theory on top of PP is found to yield energies nearly equivalent to pCCD. These results clarify the role of pair-based ansätze and open avenues for hybrid approaches that combine the strengths of orbital- and geminal-based methods.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".