Using AutoMPO with toExpH

+1 vote
asked Oct 30 by Concerned citizen (200 points)

We have recently tried to do time evolution in the Bose Hubbard model as detailed in http://itensor.org/support/322/time-evolution-in-bose-hubbard?show=322#q322.

We wanted to do time evolution on a five particle superfluid ground state with a Mott Hamiltonian and see the revival of the condensate fraction.
However, we encountered an issue performing time evolution with toExpH.
At first we tried,

auto ampo2ops = AutoMPO(sites);
for (int i = 1; i <= N; ++i) {
  ampo2ops += U/2.0,"N",i,"N-1", i;
}

auto expH = toExpH<IQTensor>(ampo2ops,tau*Cplx_i);

And defined the operators "N" and "N-1" accordingly. This did not work. The code runs, but we reach the Mott ground state and get stuck there. On the other hand,

for (int i = 1; i <= N; ++i) {
  ampo1op += U/2.0,"N(N-1)",i;
}

auto expH = toExpH<IQTensor>(ampo1op,tau*Cplx_i);

with "N(N-1)" as just one single operator, works just fine. In addition,

for (int i = 1; i <= N; ++i) {
  ampo2opagain += U/2.0,"N",i"N",i;
  ampo2opagain += -U/2.0, "N",i;
}

auto expH = toExpH<IQTensor>(ampo2opagain,tau*Cplx_i);

didn't work either.

This leads us to believe that toExpH doesn't work for two-operator autompos. Is this a bug? Do you have any workaround for this?

1 Answer

0 votes
answered Nov 9 by miles (19,400 points)

Hi, thanks for pointing out this issue. Without diving into the code examples myself yet, my best guess is that yes this is a bug. The toExpH function probably assumes implicitly that if one gives input:
ampo += "Op1",j1,"Op2",j2;
that j1 is not equal to j2.

But this should be simple to fix. In the newer AutoMPO back-end (the one just for making Hamiltonians, not exponentiating) we explicitly check for the case of products of operators acting on the same site and multiply them together before doing the logic to make the MPO.

I wouldn't say that toExpH doesn't work for two operator MPOs, since I have used it often for exactly that case. I think the issue here is that you just can't currently let the two operators act on the exact same site (although you should be able to once I fix it!). So two operators acting on different sites should work just fine.

For now please continue to just define a single-site operator such as "N(N-1)" if that's working correctly for you as a workaround, and I'll work on fixing this bug. Thanks!

Welcome to ITensor Support Q&A, where you can ask questions and receive answers from other members of the community.

Formatting Tips:
  • To format code, indent by four spaces
  • To format inline LaTeX, surround it by @@ on both sides
  • To format LaTeX on its own line, surround it by $$ above and below
  • For LaTeX, it may be necessary to backslash-escape underscore characters to obtain proper formatting. So for example writing \sum\_i to represent a sum over i.
If you cannot register due to firewall issues (e.g. you cannot see the capcha box) please email Miles Stoudenmire to ask for an account.

To report ITensor bugs, please use the issue tracker.
...