10.

6 Discussion and Outlook 553

10.6.2 Metallic and Insulating States

The presence of the unwanted logarithmic factor in the asymptotic en-
ergy density (10.36) is a clear indication that the Gutzwiller trial state
(9.16) fails to capture an essential feature of the large-ll behaviour of
the Hubbard model. We guess that the predicted ground state energy
lowering due to polarity fluctuations is too small because the density
of doubly occupied sites (10.35) is too strongly suppressed. The reason
for this waa understood [202]as follows: starting from a neutral back-
ground, the hopping process (9.38) creates a nearest-neighbour pair of
d and e sites. It is preferred that in the next step, the system returns
to a low-energy configuration via the process (9.41). Thus for large U
we should see an "effective attraction" between d and e sites: most of
the d sites are found next to an e site. The Gutzwiller wave function
does not incorporate this feature: the weight factor q N d counts merely
the total number of the d sites, without paying attention to the spatial
distribution of the sites. For this reason, the creation of d sites looks
energetically more unfavourable than it actually is.
The Gutzwiller trial state (9.16) has the general structure of a pro-
jection operator applied to a reference state

I@)= @GI@'O) (10.37)

where the Gutzwiller projector

contains the variational parameter and ISa) = IFS), the non-interacting

Fermi sea. If we want to include the possibility of an effective e-d
attraction, it is straightforward to augment the Gutzwiller Ansatz in
the following way
IS') = i)de * PG~FS) (10.39)
where the new intersite projector