Machine learning method for tight-binding Hamiltonian parameterization from ab-initio band structure
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract The tight-binding (TB) method is an ideal candidate for determining electronic and transport properties for a large-scale system. It describes the system as real-space Hamiltonian matrices expressed on a manageable number of parameters, leading to substantially lower computational costs than the ab-initio methods. Since the whole system is defined by the parameterization scheme, the choice of the TB parameters decides the reliability of the TB calculations. The typical empirical TB method uses the TB parameters directly from the existing parameter sets, which hardly reproduces the desired electronic structures quantitatively without specific optimizations. It is thus not suitable for quantitative studies like the transport property calculations. The ab-initio TB method derives the TB parameters from the ab-initio results through the transformation of basis functions, which achieves much higher numerical accuracy. However, it assumes prior knowledge of the basis and may encompass truncation error. Here, a machine learning method for TB Hamiltonian parameterization is proposed, within which a neural network (NN) is introduced with its neurons acting as the TB matrix elements. This method can construct the empirical TB model that reproduces the given ab-initio energy bands with predefined accuracy, which provides a fast and convenient way for TB model construction and gives insights into machine learning applications in physical problems.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Machine Learning in Materials Science · Ferroelectric and Negative Capacitance Devices · Fuel Cells and Related Materials
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (55)
Show source-provided references
1. Marin, E. G., Perucchini, M., Marian, D., Iannaccone, G. & Fiori, G. Modeling of electron devices based on 2-D materials. IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 65, 4167–4179 (2018).10.1109/TED.2018.2854902 ↗
2. Bloch, F. Über die Quantenmechanik der Elektronen in Kristallgittern. Z. f.ür. Phys. 52, 555–600 (1929).10.1007/BF01339455 ↗
3. Datta, S. Nanoscale device modeling: the Green’s function method. Superlattices Microstruct. 28, 253–278 (2000).10.1006/spmi.2000.0920 ↗
4. Goringe, C. M., Bowler, D. R. & Hernandez, E. Tight-binding modelling of materials. Rep. Prog. Phys. 60, 1447–1512 (1997).10.1088/0034-4885/60/12/001 ↗
5. Slater, J. C. & Koster, G. F. Simplified LCAO method for the periodic potential problem. Phys. Rev. 94, 1498–1524 (1954).10.1103/PhysRev.94.1498 ↗
6. Andersen, O. K. & Saha-Dasgupta, T. Muffin-tin orbitals of arbitrary order. Phys. Rev. B 62, 16219–16222 (2000).10.1103/PhysRevB.62.R16219 ↗
7. Marzari, N., Mostofi, A. A., Yates, J. R., Souza, I. & Vanderbilt, D. Maximally localized Wannier functions: theory and applications. Rev. Mod. Phys. 84, 57 (2012).10.1103/RevModPhys.84.1419 ↗
8. Lu, W. C., Wang, C. Z., Chan, T. L., Ruedenberg, K. & Ho, K. M. Representation of electronic structures in crystals in terms of highly localized quasiatomic minimal basis orbitals. Phys. Rev. B 70, 4 (2004).
9. Qian, X. F. et al. Quasiatomic orbitals for ab initio tight-binding analysis. Phys. Rev. B 78, 22 (2008).
10. Agapito, L. A., Ferretti, A., Calzolari, A., Curtarolo, S. & Nardelli, M. B. Effective and accurate representation of extended Bloch states on finite Hilbert spaces. Phys. Rev. B 88, 7 (2013).10.1103/PhysRevB.88.165127 ↗
11. Fiori, G. & Iannaccone, G. Multiscale modeling for graphene-based nanoscale transistors. Proc. IEEE 101, 1653–1669 (2013).10.1109/JPROC.2013.2259451 ↗
12. Rudenko, A. N., Yuan, S. J. & Katsnelson, M. I. Toward a realistic description of multilayer black phosphorus: from GW approximation to large-scale tight-binding simulations. Phys. Rev. B 92, 9 (2015).10.1103/PhysRevB.92.085419 ↗
13. Lv, Y. W., Chang, S., Wang, H., He, J. & Huang, Q. J. Energy gap tunable graphene antidot nanoribbon MOSFET: a uniform multiscale analysis from band structure to transport properties. Carbon 101, 143–151 (2016).10.1016/j.carbon.2016.01.091 ↗
14. Calogero, G., Papior, N., Koleini, M., Larsen, M. H. L. & Brandbyge, M. Multi-scale approach to first-principles electron transport beyond 100 nm. Nanoscale 11, 6153–6164 (2019).10.1039/C9NR00866G ↗
15. Lv, Y. W. et al. Prediction of stable and high-performance charge transport in zigzag tellurene nanoribbons. IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 66, 2365–2369 (2019).10.1109/TED.2019.2907122 ↗
16. Agapito, L. A., Ismail-Beigi, S., Curtarolo, S., Fornari, M. & Nardelli, M. B. Accurate tight-binding Hamiltonian matrices from ab initio calculations: minimal basis sets. Phys. Rev. B 93, 9 (2016).
17. Agapito, L. A. et al. Accurate tight-binding Hamiltonians for two-dimensional and layered materials. Phys. Rev. B 93, 8 (2016).
18. D’Amico, P. et al. Accurate ab initio tight-binding Hamiltonians: effective tools for electronic transport and optical spectroscopy from first principles. Phys. Rev. B 94, 10 (2016).
19. Marzari, N. & Vanderbilt, D. Maximally localized generalized Wannier functions for composite energy bands. Phys. Rev. B 56, 12847–12865 (1997).10.1103/PhysRevB.56.12847 ↗
20. Souza, I., Marzari, N. & Vanderbilt, D. Maximally localized Wannier functions for entangled energy bands. Phys. Rev. B 65, 13 (2002).10.1103/PhysRevB.65.100405 ↗
21. Damle, A. & Lin, L. Disentanglement via entanglement: a unified method for Wannier localization. Multiscale Model. Simul. 16, 1392–1410 (2018).10.1137/17M1129696 ↗
22. Gresch, D. et al. Automated construction of symmetrized Wannier-like tight-binding models from ab initio calculations. Phys. Rev. Mater. 2, 15 (2018).
23. Rumelhart, D. E., Hinton, G. E. & Williams, R. J. Learning representations by back-propagating errors. Nature 323, 533–536 (1986).10.1038/323533a0 ↗
24. Hu, R. H., Chang, S., Wang, H., He, J. & Huang, Q. J. Efficient multispike learning for spiking neural networks using probability-modulated timing method. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst. 30, 1984–1997 (2019).10.1109/TNNLS.2018.2875471 ↗
25. Huang, H. et al. A general group theoretical method to unfold band structures and its application. N. J. Phys. 16, 033034 (2014).10.1088/1367-2630/16/3/033034 ↗
26. Ku, W., Berlijn, T. & Lee, C.-C. Unfolding first-principles band structures. Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 216401 (2010).10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.216401 ↗
27. Giles, M. B. Collected matrix derivative results for forward and reverse mode algorithmic differentiation. Adv. Autom. Differ. 64, 35–44 (2008).10.1007/978-3-540-68942-3_4 ↗
28. Lee, D. H. & Joannopoulos, J. D. Simple scheme for surface-band calculations. Phys. Rev. B 23, 4988–4996 (1981).10.1103/PhysRevB.23.4988 ↗
29. Lihm, J. M. & Park, C. H. Reliable methods for seamless stitching of tight-binding models based on maximally localized Wannier functions. Phys. Rev. B 99, 16 (2019).10.1103/PhysRevB.99.125117 ↗
30. Sucharitakul, S. et al. Intrinsic electron mobility exceeding 10(3) cm(2)/(V s) in multilayer InSe FETs. Nano Lett. 15, 3815–3819 (2015).10.1021/acs.nanolett.5b00493 ↗
31. Bandurin, D. A. et al. High electron mobility, quantum Hall effect and anomalous optical response in atomically thin InSe. Nat. Nanotechnol. 12, 223–227 (2017).10.1038/nnano.2016.242 ↗
32. Wu, M. et al. Modulation of electronic and magnetic properties in InSe nanoribbons: edge effect. Nanotechnology 29, 205708 (2018).10.1088/1361-6528/aab3f5 ↗
33. Feng, W., Zhou, X., Tian, W. Q., Zheng, W. & Hu, P. A. Performance improvement of multilayer InSe transistors with optimized metal contacts. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 17, 3653–3658 (2015).10.1039/C4CP04968C ↗
34. Lei, S. D. et al. Evolution of the electronic band structure and efficient photo-detection in atomic layers of InSe. ACS Nano 8, 1263–1272 (2014).10.1021/nn405036u ↗
35. Magorrian, S. J., Zolyomi, V. & Fal’ko, V. I. Electronic and optical properties of two-dimensional InSe from a DFT-parametrized tight-binding model. Phys. Rev. B 94, 20 (2016).10.1103/PhysRevB.94.245431 ↗
36. Fiori, G. & Iannaccone, G. Simulation of graphene nanoribbon field-effect transistors. IEEE Electron Device Lett. 28, 760–762 (2007).10.1109/LED.2007.901680 ↗
37. Peano, V., Sapper, F. & Marquardt, F. Rapid exploration of topological band structures using deep learning. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.03296 (2019).
38. Hegde, G. & Bowen, R. C. Machine-learned approximations to density functional theory Hamiltonians. Sci. Rep. 7, 11 (2017).10.1038/s41598-017-00052-8 ↗
39. Kranz, J. J., Kubillus, M., Ramakrishnan, R., von Lilienfeld, O. A. & Elstner, M. Generalized density-functional tight-binding repulsive potentials from unsupervised machine learning. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 14, 2341–2352 (2018).10.1021/acs.jctc.7b00933 ↗
40. Zhu, J. M., Vuong, V. Q., Sumpter, B. G. & Irle, S. Artificial neural network correction for density-functional tight-binding molecular dynamics simulations. MRS Commun. 9, 867–873 (2019).10.1557/mrc.2019.80 ↗
41. Dral, P. O., von Lilienfeld, O. A. & Thiel, W. Machine learning of parameters for accurate semiempirical quantum chemical calculations. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 11, 2120–2125 (2015).10.1021/acs.jctc.5b00141 ↗
42. Li, H., Collins, C., Tanha, M., Gordon, G. J. & Yaron, D. J. A density functional tight binding layer for deep learning of chemical Hamiltonians. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 14, 5764–5776 (2018).10.1021/acs.jctc.8b00873 ↗
43. Welborn, M., Cheng, L. & Miller, T. F. Transferability in machine learning for electronic structure via the molecular orbital basis. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 14, 4772–4779 (2018).10.1021/acs.jctc.8b00636 ↗
44. Stöhr, M., Medrano Sandonas, L. & Tkatchenko, A. Accurate many-body repulsive potentials for density-functional tight binding from deep tensor neural networks. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 11, 6835–6843 (2020).10.1021/acs.jpclett.0c01307 ↗
45. Panosetti, C., Engelmann, A., Nemec, L., Reuter, K. & Margraf, J. T. Learning to use the force: fitting repulsive potentials in density-functional tight-binding with gaussian process regression. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 16, 2181–2191 (2020).10.1021/acs.jctc.9b00975 ↗
46. Huran, A. W., Steigemann, C., Frauenheim, T., Aradi, B. & Marques, M. A. L. Efficient automatized density-functional tight-binding parametrizations: application to group IV elements. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 14, 2947–2954 (2018).10.1021/acs.jctc.7b01269 ↗
47. Jain, A. et al. Commentary: The Materials Project: a materials genome approach to accelerating materials innovation. APL Mater. 1, 011002 (2013).10.1063/1.4812323 ↗
48. Rudenko, A. N. & Katsnelson, M. I. Quasiparticle band structure and tight-binding model for single- and bilayer black phosphorus. Phys. Rev. B 89, 5 (2014).10.1103/PhysRevB.89.201408 ↗
49. Tang, M. S., Wang, C. Z., Chan, C. T. & Ho, K. M. Environment-dependent tight-binding potential model. Phys. Rev. B 53, 979–982 (1996).10.1103/PhysRevB.53.979 ↗
50. Abadi, M. et al. TensorFlow: a system for large-scale machine learning. In Proc. 12th USENIX Conference on Operating Systems Design and Implementation Vol. 16, 265–283 (2016).
51. Kingma, D. & Ba, J. Adam: a method for stochastic optimization. In Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. Learn. Represent (2015).
52. Giannozzi, P. et al. QUANTUM ESPRESSO: a modular and open-source software project for quantum simulations of materials. J. Phys. Condes. Matter 21, 19 (2009).10.1088/0953-8984/21/39/395502 ↗
53. Perdew, J. P., Burke, K. & Ernzerhof, M. Generalized Gradient Approximation Made Simple. Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865–3868 (1996).10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.3865 ↗
54. Monkhorst, H. J. & Pack, J. D. Special points for Brillouin-zone integrations. Phys. Rev. B 13, 5188–5192 (1976).10.1103/PhysRevB.13.5188 ↗
55. Mostofi, A. A. et al. wannier90: A tool for obtaining maximally-localised Wannier functions. Comput. Phys. Commun. 178, 685–699 (2008).10.1016/j.cpc.2007.11.016 ↗