Fast Multipole Method: Explained by Derivator

  • Thread starter Thread starter Derivator
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Method Multipole
Derivator
Messages
147
Reaction score
0
hi,

barnes hut method approximates the interaction by treating a bunch of far away particles as one big particle located in the center of mass of the bunch of particles.

My lecture notes say, that the fast multipole methode not only does the above 'barnes hut' approximation, but also assumes, that the potential varies only slowly in the region where the particle for which the interactions should be computed is located.

In the fast multipole method, there is a multipole expansion and a taylor expansion. Is the taylor expansion modelling the slow variation of the potential, or is the taylor expansion responsible for the fact that far away bunches of particles are treated as one big single particle? Or is this for what the multipole expnsion is responsible for?

Could somone please explain?

best,
derivator
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The taylor expansion /is/ the multipole expansion. In this case you have two: One for the far away bunch of particles, and one for the region for which the interaction is computed. Both are in principle diffuse electron distributions, but here you approximate both as point multipoles.

But I would actually recommend not caring about such implementation details very much. I'm not aware of even a single program which uses the "fast multipole method" for anything; mainly because it turns out to be actually slower and less inaccurate than good implementations of the standard ways of treating the electron interaction in Hartree-Fock/Kohn-Sham programs (density fitting/resolution of the identity approximation (those two are the same thing) or screened 4index integrals). The only related implementation I can think of is Turbomole's MARIJ (multipole assisted resolution of the identity) approximation, but this is something rather different in practice, and becomes only relevant in very specific combinations of molecule size basis sets, and molecule geometry... combinations most computational chemists don't care much about.
 
ok, in the upward pass, all the multipole coefficients for the cells of different resolution levels are created. In the downward pass, the multipole coefficients in interactive cells are converted to taylor expansion coefficients, the taylor coefficients of far away cells are taken from the next lower resolution level (on this lower resolution level the far away cells of the higher resolution level are interactive cells and thus the taylor coefficients are obtained from the multipole coefficients). The interaction of particles in near cells is computed directly on the finest resolution level.

It is easy to see, that far away cells are approximated by coarse cells, simply beacuse only the taylor expansion coefficients from low resolutions cells are taken for the high resolution far cells.

But the lecture notes say, that the potential of far away mass distributions is only slowly varying in the neighborhood of an observation point. I can't see, where this is used in the Far Multipole Method.
 
i don't want to be rude, but... anybody?
*push*
 
Derivator said:
hi,
My lecture notes say, that the fast multipole methode not only does the above 'barnes hut' approximation, but also assumes, that the potential varies only slowly in the region where the particle for which the interactions should be computed is located.

i've got an idea:

is it possible, that the intention was the following:

"slowly varying functions are approximated quite reasonable by a comparatively short taylor expansion"
Is this statement true (in any sense), at all?
 
From the BCS theory of superconductivity is well known that the superfluid density smoothly decreases with increasing temperature. Annihilated superfluid carriers become normal and lose their momenta on lattice atoms. So if we induce a persistent supercurrent in a ring below Tc and after that slowly increase the temperature, we must observe a decrease in the actual supercurrent, because the density of electron pairs and total supercurrent momentum decrease. However, this supercurrent...
Hi. I have got question as in title. How can idea of instantaneous dipole moment for atoms like, for example hydrogen be consistent with idea of orbitals? At my level of knowledge London dispersion forces are derived taking into account Bohr model of atom. But we know today that this model is not correct. If it would be correct I understand that at each time electron is at some point at radius at some angle and there is dipole moment at this time from nucleus to electron at orbit. But how...
Back
Top