Simulations using perturbation theory are very different from spectrogram simulations using matrix diagonalization

General forum for EasySpin: questions, how to's, etc.
Post Reply
lulunulibiye
Newbie
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2022 8:45 pm

Simulations using perturbation theory are very different from spectrogram simulations using matrix diagonalization

Post by lulunulibiye »

Hi all,

For the same system, the simulation using perturbation theory and the simulation using matrix diagonalization affect the peak position and spectrum shape. Why is there such a big difference? I read on the easyspin website that perturbation theory does not work for electron spins with S>1/2. But for the case of spin S>1/2, can simulations using two different methods make such a big difference?

Thanks
Regards,
Lu

Attachments
微信图片_20230719175336.png
微信图片_20230719175336.png (29.53 KiB) Viewed 6089 times
微信图片_20230719175342.png
微信图片_20230719175342.png (31.94 KiB) Viewed 6089 times
Stefan Stoll
EasySpin Creator
Posts: 1108
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2014 10:11 pm
Location: University of Washington

Re: Simulations using perturbation theory are very different from spectrogram simulations using matrix diagonalization

Post by Stefan Stoll »

For perturbation theory to be applicable, all interaction energies (zero-field splitting, hyperfine) have to be significantly smaller than the microwave energy. In your case, D in Sys.D is 150 GHz, which is much larger than 9.8 GHz in Exp.mwFreq, so perturbation theory is inapplicable here.

Post Reply