Accurate computations of Rashba spinorbit coupling in interacting systems:
from the Fermi gas to real materials
Abstract
We describe the treatment of Rashba spinorbit coupling (SOC) in interacting manyfermion systems within the auxiliaryfield quantum Monte Carlo framework, and present a set of illustrative results. These include numerically exact calculations on the groundstate properties of the spinbalanced, attractive twodimensional Fermi gas, as well as a study of a tightbinding Hamiltonian with repulsive interaction. These systems are formally connected via the Hubbard Hamiltonian with SOC, but cover different physics ranging from superfluidity and triplet pairing to SOC in real materials in the presence of strong interactions in localized orbitals. We carry out detailed benchmark studies of the method in the latter case when an approximation is needed to control the sign problem for repulsive Coulomb interactions. The methods presented here provide an approach for predictive computations in materials to study the interplay of SOC and strong correlation.
sort&compress
1 Introduction
Spinorbit coupling lies at the heart of a tremendous variety of physical phenomena, in contexts ranging from semiconductors and metals to 2D heterostructures and even ultracold atoms. The field has garnered renewed interest recently due to the central role that SOC plays in many exotic topological phases, including the quantum spin Hall effect, topological insulators and superconductors, and Majorana fermions reviewRashbaMaterials (); reviewRashba_nat (); reviewRashba_rep_prog_phys (). These developments underpin modern progress in spintronics Koo1515 (); reviewSpintronics (), have opened the field of spinorbitronics, and carry important implications for quantum computation and information reviewQuantumSpintronics ().
Recent progress in the understanding and manipulation of SOC in real materials has been greatly complemented by rapid and remarkable progress in the field of cold atom physics. Two notable achievements are the ability to tune interaction strengths in ultracold gases using Feshbach resonances, and the ability to load ultracold gases into optical lattice potentials reviewBloch (); reviewLewenstein (). These techniques have ushered in a new era of quantum engineering and simulation, and provide an ideal platform to study manybody physics 2DFG_expt (); 2DFG_AFQMC (); 2DFG_DMC (); 2DFG_FINITET_PRL (). A wide variety of lattice models have already been experimentally realized, with even more likely in the near future. These clean systems, with a high degree of experimental control, offer a novel means of exploring exotic states of matter. Many of the difficulties encountered in real materials, including fixed structural and electromagnetic properties, and disorder, are surmounted in ultracold atom experiments, which can be freely tuned to probe broad parameter regimes. The third major step was the development of methods to generate “synthetic SOC” in ultracold atoms artificialgaugefieldJaksch (); PhysRevLett.95.010403 (); PhysRevLett.108.225303 (); PhysRevLett.107.255301 (); PhysRevLett.111.185302 (); GerbierArtifcialGaugeFields (), which has created new paths towards the realization of many of the exotic states long sought after in real materials, such as high superconductivity and topological phases, including quantum spin Hall states and Majorana fermions. These techniques have enabled experimental emulations of a wide variety of fundamental models, including several with Rashba, Dresselhaus, or equal RashbaDresselhaus SOC SOC_BEC_2009 (); SOC_BEC_2011 (); SOC_DFG_CHEUK (); SOC_DFG_WANG (); RASHBASOC2D_EXPT ().
This expanding experimental horizon has generated tremendous opportunities for theoretical and numerical approaches to manybody systems. The delicate nature of many of the exotic states demands highaccuracy theoretical and numerical input. Careful characterization of these phases, and their behavior in the presence of strong interactions, will provide crucial benchmarks for experiments as well as essential guidelines for the design and fabrication of novel devices reviewSpinHallDevices (). These systems are typically quite challenging from a theoretical or numerical perspective. Ab initio treatment of stronglycorrelated real materials remains an outstanding challenge in manybody physics. However, ultracold atom experiments, which can be measured to high accuracy, offer a unique opportunity to test and calibrate our theoretical and computational methods.
The auxiliaryfield quantum Monte Carlo (AFQMC) method is a general computational approach for interacting manyfermion systems. AFQMC has been applied to a variety of electronic models and materials without SOC, including Hubbardlike models MingpuHubbardBenchmark (); Haosymmetry (), molecular systems AFQMC_backprop_molecules (); HydrogenBenchmark (); Mo2_AFQMC (), and solids AFQMC_downfolding (). In ultracold atoms, a number of recent successes have highlighted the accuracy and capability of AFQMC, including studies of the attractive spinbalanced Fermi gas 2DFG_AFQMC (); Ettoregaps () and fully treating interaction and Rashba SOC on the same footing 2DFG_SOC_AFQMC (); 2DFG_RASHBASOC_OPLATT_AFQMC (). The Hamiltonian for the spinbalanced system with contact interaction preserves timereversal symmetry, thus guaranteeing that simulations are free of the sign problem nosignproblem (), so the results obtained are numerically exact. This is a particularly notable achievement given the emergence of quantum gas microscopes with singlesite resolution PhysRevLett.116.235301 (); Greif953 (); Cheuk2015 (); Haller2015 (); Parsons2015 (), which provide a precise calibration of the technique via direct comparison with a clean, tunable system.
A natural next step is to treat electronic Hamiltonians with SOC, which is the topic of focus in the present paper. We present an illustrative set of results on the attractive 2D Fermi gas with Rashba SOC, as well as the first study of Rashba SOC in a real material context using AFQMC. From the ultracold atom Hamiltonians we have treated, an immediate connection to real materials can be made by considering systems with repulsive interactions. We demonstrate the capabilities of the AFQMC method by considering a repulsive Hubbard model, which captures much of the underlying physics of real materials. In this way, the two types of systems we study here, the real material and ultracold atoms, are described by a similar Hamiltonian, namely the Hubbard model, with opposite sign interactions. This Hamiltonian is of fundamental importance in condensed matter and manybody physics. It can be engineered and emulated by optical lattice experiments 2DHubbard_Hulet (), with the sign of the interaction controlled using Feshbach resonances. This would permit a direct comparison of experimental results with our calculations, and consequently a better understanding of the physics of both systems, as well as an additional calibration of the AFQMC method.
With the repulsive interaction in the Hubbard model, the sign problem reemerges in AFQMC, but as we will show, this can be systematically controlled by applying a constraint CPMC (). The accuracy achieved is comparable to what has been systematically seen in real materials without SOC. Since the AFQMC method provides access to a wide range of observables to probe the charge, spin, pairing, and transport properties, we expect this development to lead to significant applications in correlated materials with strong SOC.
We organize the remainder of the paper as follows. In section 2 we introduce the general Hamiltonian used to describe systems with Rashba SOC, and establish its connection to both real materials and the Fermi gas. Section 3 outlines the AFQMC method, highlighting several of the recent advances incorporated to treat SOC. Two different sampling approaches are discussed, for cases without and with the sign problem, respectively. Section 4 provides a demonstration of the technique, first in the context of cold atoms and then on a repulsive Hubbard model, which is closely connected to the behavior of real materials. Finally, section 5 summarizes and offers an outlook on open questions and promising directions in this burgeoning field.
2 Hamiltonian
We begin with a form of the SOC Hamiltonian on a lattice,
(1) 
where creates a spin ( or ) particle with momentum , and denotes the density operator in realspace on site with spin. Although we have used the Rashba form of SOC, our discussions are general for other types. For twodimensional lattice systems the dispersion and SOC terms are and . The parameter , set to unity throughout this work, determines the strength of nearestneighbor hopping, the parameter controls the strength of SOC, and the parameter determines the strength of the onsite interaction. For the Fermi gas, which represents the lowdensity limit of the lattice model, and . In both cases, a natural description of the system in terms of helicity bands, , is obtained by diagonalizing the noninteracting Hamiltonian.
The Fermi gas Hamiltonian is defined in the dilute limit of Eq. (1), and the interaction is negative: . In order to directly compare with experiments, the parameters and are fully specified, as we further discuss in Sec. 4.1. The physics is dictated by the quantity , where the Fermi wavevector measures the inverse of the average interparticle spacing while is the scattering length. As decreases in 2D, the system undergoes a BCSBEC crossover. Our study will examine the interplay between this effect and SOC, which induces triplet pairing.
For the second application, namely as a model for electronic systems, we will consider , and consider a range of values for from to about , which represents strong local interactions as is typical in models for cuprates. Most of our calculations will be at intermediate interaction , and we examine different regimes of SOC strength by varying . Our study here is mostly for testing the algorithm. In most cases we focus on small lattice sizes for which we can obtain exact results from exact diagonalization. With this description of the model for both cases, we can now outline its treatment within the AFQMC framework.
3 Methods
3.1 Preliminaries
We will first provide an overview of the AFQMC method Lecturenotes (); BSS (); Koonin (), and then discuss some of the extensions necessary to treat systems with SOC. In general, groundstate QMC methods rely on imaginarytime projection to obtain the manybody groundstate of a given hamiltonian from a starting trial wavefunction . This projection proceeds according to,
(2) 
provided (i.e. the trial wavefunction cannot be orthogonal to the manybody groundstate).
In order to carry out this projection numerically, we first discretize the imaginary time interval into time slices,
(3) 
so that the limit in (2) can be obtained iteratively via,
(4) 
with .
To proceed, we must rewrite the manybody propagator in a singleparticle form. This is accomplished by applying the TrotterSuzuki breakup,
(5) 
where contains the onebody terms and the twobody terms of the Hamiltonian in (1). This step is followed by a suitable HubbardStratonovich (HS) transformation continuousHStransformation (). We list below four varieties of discrete HS transformation commonly used in AFQMC simulations: The charge decomposition HS_transform_discrete () is written,
(6) 
with determined according to ; The spin decomposition in the  or direction has the form,
(7) 
and the spin decomposition in the direction is,
(8) 
A decomposition in the  plane can also be obtained by using a linear combination of and .
In Eqs (7) and (8),
, and the spin operators are defined as:
;
;
.
This procedure yields the following form for the propagator,
(9) 
where is a set of auxiliary fields at a given time slice, with dimension equal to the size of the singleparticle basis, which in the case of lattice systems is typically the number of lattice sites. Using the charge decomposition as an example, the probability density function is uniform, and,
(10) 
with . The manybody propagator is now composed of single particle operators with the fermions in external auxiliary fields. The integration over auxiliary field configurations recovers the twobody interactions.
3.2 Metropolis sampling of paths in AF space
Groundstate observables are calculated according to,
(11) 
The denominator in (11) is,
(12) 
where,
(13) 
and we have introduced the notation,
In the above, represents an auxiliary field configuration at time slice , and the collection of auxiliary fields comprises a path in auxiliary field space.
With this shorthand, Eq. (11) can be written as a path integral over auxiliary fields,
(14) 
with,
(15) 
This integral can be evaluated using standard Monte Carlo techniques, such as the Metropolis algorithm, which samples auxiliaryfields from to obtain a Monte Carlo estimate of the expectation value in (14). To accelerate the sampling procedure we employ a dynamic force bias 2DFG_AFQMC (); Lecturenotes (), which improves the acceptance ratio and consequently the efficiency of the algorithm. In addition, we remove the infinite variance problem using the bridge link method inf_var ().
3.3 Branching random walks and the constraint
In systems that preserve timereversal symmetry, such as the spinbalanced attractive Hubbard model (even in the presence of SOC, as discussed below) or the halffilled repulsive Hubbard model, the denominator remains positive and the pathintegrals in Eq. (11) can be calculated with the Monte Carlo technique outlined above, which samples the probability density function via the Metropolis algorithm. In cases where timereversal symmetry is broken, is no longer guaranteed to be positive, and the Monte Carlo signal obtained by this straightforward sampling procedure is lost to sampling noise. This is a manifestation of the wellknown sign problem Lecturenotes ().
In order to treat systems with a sign problem we recast the procedure outlined above as an openended random walk in Slaterdeterminant space, which then allows the imposition of a constraint to prevent the decay of the Monte Carlo signal CPMC (). Returning to (4), we have,
(16) 
In this formulation the wave function at each step is represented by an ensemble of Slater determinants,
(17) 
where denotes the weight for the th walker at time step , and the sum runs over the entire walker population at that time step.
To eliminate the sign problem we impose a constrainedpath (CP) approximation CPMC (); Lecturenotes (), which requires at each time step that all walkers maintain positive overlap with ,
(18) 
To implement this constraint within the random walk procedure we define an importance function,
(19) 
which prevents walkers from acquiring a negative overlap with .
With the addition of importance sampling we carry out a modified version of the random walk,
(20) 
with modified probability density function,
(21) 
and modified wavefunction,
(22) 
The true wavefunction is then,
(23) 
The modified projection equation written in (20) is identical to the version in (16). In the modified version auxiliary fields are sampled from , which favors determinants with larger overlaps with , and vanishes if the overlap is zero, thus enforcing the constraint in (18). After the random walk has equilibrated, the ground state wavefunction is represented by the distribution of weighted random walkers.
It is important to note that the branching random walk approach discussed here is closely related to the Metropolis sampling discussed in Sec. 3.2. (The dynamic force bias we use in the Metropolis sampling has the same origin and the same form as that obtained from the importance sampling of in Eq. (21).) The only difference is that the Metropolis procedure, while more convenient for computing observables, encounters severe ergodicity problems when the constraint has to be imposed. In the current approach, the total energy is calculated in a manner similar to that in Sec. 3.2, except is fixed to be . For computing observables that do not commute with the Hamiltonian, we use the backpropagation technique CPMC (); AFQMC_bosons (); AFQMC_backprop_molecules ().
3.4 Generalizations to SOC
Having outlined the standard AFQMC procedures, we can now address the modifications necessary to treat SOC. In systems without SOC, there is no mixing of different spin sectors, so random walkers can be factored into  and spin components,
(24) 
For a system of particles with single particle orbitals of dimension , the walker is just a Slater determinant, , with matrix form,
(25) 
The one body propagator used to project these random walkers can also be split into  and spin components,
(26) 
where contains only spin operators, and contains only spin. We set to be the matrix representation of , which is a square matrix.
The above applies to both the Metropolis and the branching random walk approaches. In the Metropolis approach discussed in Sec. 3.2, each path preserves the original spin sectors defined by , and both and will take the same form. In the branching random walk approach discussed in Sec. 3.3, each walker will remain in the same form.
When SOC is included the simple factorization into separate spin components is no longer possible. Instead, each random walker must be in generalized HartreeFock (GHF) form consisting of spinorbitals, which has a matrix representation ,
(27) 
with . In more compact notation,
(28) 
where in general the are linear combinations of and , corresponding to Eq. 25. In the absence of SOC, reduces to , and . Because the one body operator couples spin and spin, its matrix representation, , is now ,
(29) 
Note that is zero in the absence of SOC. The ensemble of random walkers, now in the form of Slater determinants, is propagated and sampled until the procedure converges to a stochastic representation of the manybody groundstate.
Observables are computed using the Green’s function between two Slater determinants, which can be measured by,
(30) 
Each is a matrix, obtained according to,
(31) 
As with the random walkers and onebody propagators, the application of Wick’s theorem must be modified due to the inclusion of SOC. Spinflip terms in the Wick expansion, which make no contribution before and can be neglected, must now be included.
We take as an example the calculation of double occupancy,
(32) 
Without SOC, this observable has the form,
(33) 
In the presence of SOC it takes the expanded form,
(34) 
We note that Hamiltonians which include pairing terms can be treated with an additional generalization, where the walker is extend to HartreeFockBogoliubov space HFB_paper ().
4 Results
Having provided a brief description of the AFQMC method, we present in the following sections an illustration of its capabilities by highlighting a small set of the many observables that the method makes possible to measure to high accuracy. We discuss results for ultracold atoms and the repulsive electronic model in two separate subsections.
4.1 Fermi atomic gas with synthetic SOC
We begin with a survey of recent results on ultracold atoms, where we will focus on dilute Fermi gas systems in 2D. Further results can be found in 2DFG_SOC_AFQMC (), including results for optical lattices 2DFG_RASHBASOC_OPLATT_AFQMC (). As mentioned in Sec. 2, the Hamiltonian has here. The calculations are performed at the dilute limit, with . In order to map the results to the continuum system of Fermi atomic gases studied in experiment, we first introduce an overall energy scaling defined by the groundstate energy per particle of the corresponding noninteracting Fermi gas, , with being the number density for the 2D lattice. The interaction strength is uniquely defined WernerCastin (); 2DFG_AFQMC () by . In order to compare physically equivalent systems we introduce two dimensionless parameters:
(35) 
that specify the strengths of the SOC and interaction, respectively. In the above, is the twobody binding energy at and is directly related to 2DFG_AFQMC (). The strong SOC regime, characterized by occupation of only the helicity band, occurs for . In the weak SOC regime (), both and are occupied. There is a smooth transition between the two regimes at . Small corresponds to the BCS limit of the BCSBEC crossover, where the physics is best described in terms of weakly interacting Cooper pairs, whereas large corresponds to the BEC limit, in which strongly interacting fermions are bound into tight pairs resembling bosons.
Figures 1 and 2 plot two examples of the computed momentum distribution and pairing wavefunctions. The first figure corresponds to a weakly interacting system, with , and the second to a strongly interacting system, with . Both systems are in the modest SOC regime, with . Large lattice sizes are treated here, so that the residual discretization error and finitesize (number of particles) error are small. The results provide quantitative information for the continuum bulk 2D Fermi gas.
The momentum distribution in the weakly interacting system differs only slightly from the noninteracting case, whose regions of occupation and Fermi surfaces (one for each helicity band) are indicated by the shading and vertical dashed lines. At large interaction strength the momentum distribution reveals that there is occupation of higher momentum states that are well beyond the noninteracting region. In addition to becoming considerably broader as a function of interaction strength, the distribution also becomes smoother, showing no evidence of the cusps present at small interaction strengths.
AFQMC also provides access, at a quantitative level, to the rich pairing structure induced by the presence of SOC. The bottom row of figures 1 and 2 present two examples of the pairing wavefunction. SOC mixes the singlet and triplet channels, so the pairing wavefunction has both singlet and triplet components. At small interaction strengths the pairing wavefunction has strong peaks indicating that pairing is concentrated near the Fermi surfaces. Also evident is the fact that the singlet and triplet components of the pairing wavefunction have similar amplitude. This is no longer the case for strongly interacting systems, which favor singlet pairing over triplet pairing because of the enhanced onsite attraction, as reflected by the relative amplitude of the two components of the pairing wavefunction. As a reflection of the behavior of the momentum distribution, the welllocalized peaks of the pairing wavefunction also become broad and smooth at large interaction strength, suggesting that pairing occurs across a wide range of momenta.
We can also reliably measure many other observables, including chargecharge and spinspin correlation functions. Figures 3 and 4 illustrate the effects of SOC on the chargecharge and spinspin correlations at two different values of interaction strength. At weak interaction (Fig. 3) and weak SOC, the chargecharge correlation exhibits a small amplitude oscillation about the square of the average density. This oscillation is suppressed as SOC strength is increased. The spinspin correlation shows an opposite effect, with a small oscillation about zero at large SOC strength that is not present for weak SOC. With increased interaction strength (Fig. 4), both correlation functions become shorter ranged with larger amplitude, which is evident in the steeper slopes of each as they approach their asymptotic values.
4.2 Towards real materials — the repulsive Hubbard model with SOC
As a demonstration of the applicability of this approach to electronic systems, we present a study of the repulsive Hubbard model with Rashba SOC. We first examine the energetics, which highlight the capability of CPAFQMC to achieve highaccuracy results for systems with a sign problem. To benchmark our method we focus on a supercell with electrons, for which we perform exact diagonalization calculations for comparison.
Plotted in Fig. 5 is the total energy as a function of SOC strength at an interaction strength , in comparison with exact results. In this set of simulations the freeelectron wavefunction was used as the trial wavefunction (see Eq. (18)). Very good agreement is seen with exact results. The slightly larger discrepancy at small SOC strength can be improved with an improved trial wavefunction, as illustrated in Fig. 6. In this case a generalized HartreeFock solution was used as and the CPAFQMC energy shows improved convergence to the exact energy. The behavior of the algorithm as a function of interaction strength is investigated in Fig. 7, which shows the total energy vs. at a fixed SOC strength of . Nearly exact results are obtained for up to intermediate interaction. Even in the strong interaction limit, the relative error is a small fraction of a percent, which is well within the accuracy of AFQMC seen in Hubbardlike models MingpuHubbardBenchmark (); Haosymmetry () or in molecules and solids AFQMC_backprop_molecules (); HydrogenBenchmark (); AFQMC_downfolding ().
In addition to groundstate energies, highaccuracy measurements of other observables, including charge, spin and pairing properties, are possible with CPAFQMC. As indicated in the procedure outlined above, observables can be obtained from the Green’s function, which is calculated according to (31). We show an example of the Green’s function in Fig. 8. Comparison of the CPAFQMC result with the exact result establishes the high degree of accuracy attainable in CPAFQMC measurements of observables.
5 Summary and Outlook
Spinorbit coupling is an essential ingredient of many fascinating phenomena across a wide range of physical contexts. From spintronics to topological insulators to quantum information, a precise characterization of the behavior of systems subject to SOC will not only improve the fundamental understanding of these phenomena and phases, it will also inspire and guide the fabrication of new devices.
The results presented here show the applicability and the accuracy of the AFQMC method, which provides precision, and in some cases, such as the attractive 2D Fermi gas, numerically exact treatments of strongly interacting manybody systems. As we have demonstrated, AFQMC is well suited to study lattice models with either attractive or repulsive interactions. More realistic treatments of materials can be achieved by replacing the onsite Hubbard interaction with generalized (4index) twobody matrix elements. Interactions of this generalized form can be incorporated using any singleparticle basis, such as plane waves or Gaussians, but require a new decomposition and HubbardStratonovich transformation, which introduces complex auxiliary fields and consequently a phase problem. This problem can be systematically controlled using a generalization of the CP approach, the phaseless approximation PRLphaseless (), which can achieve similar accuracy to what is illustrated above, in realistic material simulations HydrogenBenchmark (); AFQMC_downfolding (). Our discussion of the treatment of SOC carries through straightforwardly, using GHFtype walkers. As we have demonstrated, this approach enables the treatment of SOC with no degradation of the exquisite accuracy achievable in electronic structure calculations with AFQMC.
As the experimental and theoretical landscape continues to expand, there will be many opportunities
and challenges in the study of SOC and strong interaction in manybody systems. These challenges,
including characterizing the effect of interaction on topological phases PhysRevB.89.195124 (); PhysRevB.90.245120 (); annurevconmatphysSPT (), will require complementary theoretical, numerical, and experimental progress to generate
new understanding. Given its unique ability to treat stronglycorrelated manybody systems with high precision,
AFQMC will play a vital role in the combined effort.
Acknowledgments This research was supported by NSF (grant no. DMR1409510), and the Simons Foundation. Computing was
carried out at the Extreme Science and Engineering Discovery
Environment (XSEDE), which is supported by
NSF grant number ACI1053575, and the computational
facilities at the College of William and Mary. The Flatiron Institute is supported by the Simons Foundation.
References

(1)
A. Machon, H. C. Koo, J. Nitta, S. Frolov, R. Duine,
New perspectives for Rashba
spinorbit coupling, Nature Materials 14 (2015) 871–882.
doi:10.1038/nmat4360.
URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nmat4360 
(2)
A. Soumyanarayanan, N. Reyren, A. Fert, C. Panagopoulos,
Emergent phenomena induced by
spinorbit coupling at surfaces and interfaces, Nature 539 (2016) 509–517.
doi:10.1038/nature19820.
URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature19820 
(3)
D. Bercioux, P. Lucignano,
Quantum transport in
Rashba spinÐorbit materials: a review, Reports on Progress in Physics
78 (10) (2015) 106001.
URL http://stacks.iop.org/00344885/78/i=10/a=106001 
(4)
H. C. Koo, J. H. Kwon, J. Eom, J. Chang, S. H. Han, M. Johnson,
Control of Spin
Precession in a SpinInjected Field Effect Transistor, Science 325 (5947)
(2009) 1515–1518.
arXiv:http://science.sciencemag.org/content/325/5947/1515.full.pdf,
doi:10.1126/science.1173667.
URL http://science.sciencemag.org/content/325/5947/1515 
(5)
C. Chappert, A. Fert, F. N. Van Dau,
The emergence of spin electronics
in data storage, Nature Materials 6 (2007) 813–823.
doi:10.1038/nmat2024.
URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nmat2024 
(6)
D. D. Awschalom, L. C. Bassett, A. S. Dzurak, E. L. Hu, J. R. Petta,
Quantum
Spintronics: Engineering and Manipulating AtomLike Spins in
Semiconductors, Science 339 (6124) (2013) 1174–1179.
arXiv:http://science.sciencemag.org/content/339/6124/1174.full.pdf,
doi:10.1126/science.1231364.
URL http://science.sciencemag.org/content/339/6124/1174 
(7)
I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, W. Zwerger,
Manybody physics
with ultracold gases, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80 (2008) 885–964.
doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.80.885.
URL http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.80.885 
(8)
M. Lewenstein, A. Sanpera, V. Ahufinger, B. Damski, A. Sen(De), U. Sen,
Ultracold atomic gases in
optical lattices: mimicking condensed matter physics and beyond, Advances
in Physics 56 (2) (2007) 243–379.
doi:10.1080/00018730701223200.
URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00018730701223200 
(9)
A. A. Orel, P. Dyke, M. Delehaye, C. J. Vale, H. Hu,
Density distribution
of a trapped twodimensional strongly interacting Fermi gas, New Journal of
Physics 13 (11) (2011) 113032.
URL http://stacks.iop.org/13672630/13/i=11/a=113032 
(10)
H. Shi, S. Chiesa, S. Zhang,
Groundstate
properties of strongly interacting Fermi gases in two dimensions, Phys.
Rev. A 92 (2015) 033603.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.92.033603.
URL http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.92.033603 
(11)
G. Bertaina, S. Giorgini,
BCSBEC
Crossover in a TwoDimensional Fermi Gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 (2011)
110403.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.110403.
URL http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.110403 
(12)
E. R. Anderson, J. E. Drut,
Pressure,
Compressibility, and Contact of the TwoDimensional Attractive Fermi Gas,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) 115301.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.115301.
URL http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.115301 
(13)
D. Jaksch, P. Zoller,
Creation of effective
magnetic fields in optical lattices: the Hofstadter butterfly for cold
neutral atoms, New Journal of Physics 5 (1) (2003) 56.
URL http://stacks.iop.org/13672630/5/i=1/a=356 
(14)
K. Osterloh, M. Baig, L. Santos, P. Zoller, M. Lewenstein,
Cold Atoms in
NonAbelian Gauge Potentials: From the Hofstadter ”Moth” to Lattice Gauge
Theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005) 010403.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.010403.
URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.010403 
(15)
K. JiménezGarcía, L. J. LeBlanc, R. A. Williams, M. C. Beeler, A. R.
Perry, I. B. Spielman,
Peierls
Substitution in an Engineered Lattice Potential, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108
(2012) 225303.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.225303.
URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.225303 
(16)
M. Aidelsburger, M. Atala, S. Nascimbène, S. Trotzky, Y.A. Chen, I. Bloch,
Experimental
Realization of Strong Effective Magnetic Fields in an Optical Lattice,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 107 (2011) 255301.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.255301.
URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.255301 
(17)
H. Miyake, G. A. Siviloglou, C. J. Kennedy, W. C. Burton, W. Ketterle,
Realizing the
Harper Hamiltonian with LaserAssisted Tunneling in Optical Lattices, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 111 (2013) 185302.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.185302.
URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.185302 
(18)
F. Gerbier, J. Dalibard,
Gauge fields for
ultracold atoms in optical superlattices, New Journal of Physics 12 (3)
(2010) 033007.
URL http://stacks.iop.org/13672630/12/i=3/a=033007 
(19)
Y.J. Lin, R. L. Compton, K. JimenezGarcia, J. V. Porto, I. B. Spielman,
Synthetic magnetic fields for
ultracold neutral atoms, Nature 462 (2009) 628–632.
doi:10.1038/nature08609.
URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature08609 
(20)
Y.J. Lin, K. JimenezGarcia, I. B. Spielman,
Spinorbitcoupled
BoseEinstein condensates, Nature 471 (2011) 83–86.
doi:10.1038/nature09887.
URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature09887 
(21)
L. W. Cheuk, A. T. Sommer, Z. Hadzibabic, T. Yefsah, W. S. Bakr, M. W.
Zwierlein,
SpinInjection
Spectroscopy of a SpinOrbit Coupled Fermi Gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 (2012)
095302.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.095302.
URL http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.095302 
(22)
P. Wang, Z.Q. Yu, Z. Fu, J. Miao, L. Huang, S. Chai, H. Zhai, J. Zhang,
SpinOrbit
Coupled Degenerate Fermi Gases, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 (2012) 095301.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.095301.
URL http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.095301 
(23)
L. Huang, Z. Meng, P. Wang, P. Peng, S.L. Zhang, L. Chen, D. Li,
Q. Zhou, J. Zhang,
Experimental realization of a
twodimensional synthetic spinorbit coupling in ultracold Fermi gases,
Nature Physics 12 (2016) 540.
doi:10.1038/nphys3672.
URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nphys3672 
(24)
T. Jungwirth, J. Wunderlich, K. Olejnik,
Spin Hall effect devices, Nature
Materials 11 (2012) 382–390.
doi:10.1038/nmat3279.
URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nmat3279 
(25)
M. Qin, H. Shi, S. Zhang,
Benchmark study
of the twodimensional Hubbard model with auxiliaryfield quantum Monte Carlo
method, Phys. Rev. B 94 (2016) 085103.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.94.085103.
URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.94.085103 
(26)
H. Shi, S. Zhang,
Symmetry in
auxiliaryfield quantum Monte Carlo calculations, Phys. Rev. B 88 (2013)
125132.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.88.125132.
URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.88.125132  (27) M. Motta, S. Zhang, Computation of groundstate properties in molecular systems: backpropagation with auxiliaryfield quantum Monte Carlo, ArXiv eprintsarXiv:1707.02684.
 (28) M. Motta, D. M. Ceperley, G. KinLic Chan, J. A. Gomez, E. Gull, S. Guo, C. JimenezHoyos, T. Nguyen Lan, J. Li, F. Ma, A. J. Millis, N. V. Prokof’ev, U. Ray, G. E. Scuseria, S. Sorella, E. M. Stoudenmire, Q. Sun, I. S. Tupitsyn, S. R. White, D. Zgid, S. Zhang, Towards the solution of the manyelectron problem in real materials: equation of state of the hydrogen chain with stateoftheart manybody methods, ArXiv eprintsarXiv:1705.01608.

(29)
W. Purwanto, S. Zhang, H. Krakauer,
Auxiliaryfield quantum Monte
Carlo calculations of the molybdenum dimer, The Journal of Chemical Physics
144 (24) (2016) 244306.
doi:10.1063/1.4954245.
URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4954245 
(30)
F. Ma, W. Purwanto, S. Zhang, H. Krakauer,
Quantum Monte
Carlo Calculations in Solids with Downfolded Hamiltonians, Phys. Rev. Lett.
114 (2015) 226401.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.226401.
URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.226401  (31) E. Vitali, H. Shi, M. Qin, S. Zhang, Visualizing the BECBCS crossover in the twodimensional Fermi gas: pairing gaps and dynamical response functions from ab initio computations, ArXiv eprintsarXiv:1705.07929.

(32)
H. Shi, P. Rosenberg, S. Chiesa, S. Zhang,
Rashba
SpinOrbit Coupling, Strong Interactions, and the BCSBEC Crossover in the
Ground State of the TwoDimensional Fermi Gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (2016)
040401.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.040401.
URL http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.040401  (33) P. Rosenberg, H. Shi, S. Zhang, Ultracold atoms in a square lattice with spinorbit coupling: Charge order, superfluidity, and topological signatures, ArXiv eprintsarXiv:1707.02994.

(34)
C. Wu, S.C. Zhang,
Sufficient
condition for absence of the sign problem in the fermionic quantum Monte
Carlo algorithm, Phys. Rev. B 71 (2005) 155115.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.71.155115.
URL http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.71.155115 
(35)
L. W. Cheuk, M. A. Nichols, K. R. Lawrence, M. Okan, H. Zhang, M. W. Zwierlein,
Observation of
2D Fermionic Mott Insulators of with SingleSite
Resolution, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 235301.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.235301.
URL http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.235301 
(36)
D. Greif, M. F. Parsons, A. Mazurenko, C. S. Chiu, S. Blatt, F. Huber, G. Ji,
M. Greiner,
Siteresolved
imaging of a fermionic Mott insulator, Science 351 (6276) (2016) 953–957.
arXiv:http://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6276/953.full.pdf,
doi:10.1126/science.aad9041.
URL http://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6276/953  (37) L. W. Cheuk, M. A. Nichols, M. Okan, T. Gersdorf, V. V. Ramasesh, W. S. Bakr, T. Lompe, M. W. Zwierlein, Quantumgas microscope for fermionic atoms, Physical Review Letters 114 (19) (2015) 1–5. arXiv:1503.02648, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.193001.

(38)
E. Haller, J. Hudson, A. Kelly, D. A. Cotta, B. Peaudecerf, G. D. Bruce,
S. Kuhr, Singleatom imaging of
fermions in a quantumgas microscope, Nat Phys 11 (2015) 738–742.
doi:10.1038/nphys3403.
URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nphys3403 
(39)
M. F. Parsons, F. Huber, A. Mazurenko, C. S. Chiu, W. Setiawan,
K. WooleyBrown, S. Blatt, M. Greiner,
Siteresolved
imaging of fermionic in an optical lattice, Phys. Rev.
Lett. 114 (2015) 213002.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.213002.
URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.213002 
(40)
R. A. Hart, P. M. Duarte, T.L. Yang, X. Liu, T. Paiva, E. Khatami, R. T.
Scalettar, N. Trivedi, D. A. Huse, R. G. Hulet,
Observation of
antiferromagnetic correlations in the Hubbard model with ultracold atoms,
Nature 519 (2015) 211–214.
doi:10.1038/nature14223.
URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature14223 
(41)
S. Zhang, J. Carlson, J. E. Gubernatis,
Constrained path
Monte Carlo method for fermion ground states, Phys. Rev. B 55 (1997)
7464–7477.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.55.7464.
URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.55.7464  (42) S. Zhang, in: E. Pavarini, E. Koch, U. Schollwöck (Eds.), Emergent Phenomena in Correlated Matter: Modeling and Simulation, Vol. 3, Verlag des Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany, 2013.
 (43) F. F. Assaad, Quantum Monte Carlo Methods on Lattices: The Determinantal Approach, in: J. Grotendorst, D. Marx, A. Muramatsu (Eds.), Quantum Simulations of Complex ManyBody Systems: From Theory to Algorithms, Vol. 10, NIC, Jülich, Germany, 2002, pp. 99–156.

(44)
G. Sugiyama, S. Koonin,
Auxiliary
field MonteCarlo for quantum manybody ground states, Annals of Physics
168 (1) (1986) 1 – 26.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/00034916(86)901077.
URL http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0003491686901077 
(45)
J. Hubbard,
Calculation of
Partition Functions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 3 (1959) 77–78.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.3.77.
URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.3.77 
(46)
J. E. Hirsch,
Discrete
HubbardStratonovich transformation for fermion lattice models, Phys. Rev.
B 28 (1983) 4059–4061.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.28.4059.
URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.28.4059 
(47)
H. Shi, S. Zhang,
Infinite variance
in fermion quantum Monte Carlo calculations, Phys. Rev. E 93 (2016) 033303.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.93.033303.
URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevE.93.033303 
(48)
W. Purwanto, S. Zhang,
Quantum Monte
Carlo method for the ground state of manyboson systems, Phys. Rev. E 70
(2004) 056702.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.70.056702.
URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevE.70.056702 
(49)
H. Shi, S. Zhang,
Manybody
computations by stochastic sampling in HartreeFockBogoliubov space, Phys.
Rev. B 95 (2017) 045144.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.95.045144.
URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.95.045144 
(50)
F. Werner, Y. Castin,
General relations
for quantum gases in two and three dimensions: Twocomponent fermions,
Phys. Rev. A 86 (2012) 013626.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.86.013626.
URL http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.86.013626 
(51)
S. Zhang, H. Krakauer,
Quantum Monte
Carlo Method using PhaseFree Random Walks with Slater Determinants, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 90 (2003) 136401.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.136401.
URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.136401 
(52)
C. Wang, T. Senthil,
Interacting
fermionic topological insulators/superconductors in three dimensions, Phys.
Rev. B 89 (2014) 195124.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.89.195124.
URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.89.195124 
(53)
Y.Z. You, C. Xu,
Symmetryprotected
topological states of interacting fermions and bosons, Phys. Rev. B 90
(2014) 245120.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.90.245120.
URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.90.245120 
(54)
T. Senthil,
SymmetryProtected
Topological Phases of Quantum Matter, Annual Review of Condensed Matter
Physics 6 (1) (2015) 299–324.
arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1146/annurevconmatphys031214014740,
doi:10.1146/annurevconmatphys031214014740.
URL https://doi.org/10.1146/annurevconmatphys031214014740