Skip to content

Operator identities turn long strings of creation and annihilation operators into quantities such as occupation numbers, symmetry generators, and correlation functions. This sheet gives the useful algebra together with its assumptions; the linked derivations explain why it works.

Required background. Commutators and anticommutators define the brackets; creation and annihilation operators introduce canonical modes.

Polynomial identities are exact for matrices satisfying the stated algebra. Exact bosonic commutators require an infinite-dimensional space: taking the trace of [a,a†]=I[a,a^\dagger]=I rules out a finite matrix representation. A truncated oscillator therefore needs special care at its highest occupation.

For unbounded operators, products require specified domains. Formal algebra on a common invariant core does not by itself establish equality of closed operators or self-adjointness. Exponentials, traces, and infinite sums also need the convergence conditions stated below.

The ordinary commutator and anticommutator are

[A,B]≡AB−BA,{A,B}≡AB+BA.\begin{aligned} [A,B] &\equiv AB-BA, \\ \{A,B\} &\equiv AB+BA. \end{aligned}

For canonical modes, define

η={+1,bosons,−1,fermions.\eta = \begin{cases} +1, & \text{bosons},\\ -1, & \text{fermions}. \end{cases}

Then one compact algebra is

didj†−ηdj†di=δij,didj−ηdjdi=0,di†dj†−ηdj†di†=0.\begin{aligned} d_i d_j^\dagger -\eta d_j^\dagger d_i &= \delta_{ij}, \\ d_i d_j -\eta d_j d_i &= 0, \\ d_i^\dagger d_j^\dagger -\eta d_j^\dagger d_i^\dagger &= 0. \end{aligned}

Thus η=+1\eta=+1 gives bosonic commutators and η=−1\eta=-1 gives fermionic anticommutators. Ordinary commutators remain ordinary commutators even when the operators are fermionic; the graded bracket is introduced separately below.

For bounded operators (in particular finite matrices), the adjoint reverses order:

(AB)†=B†A†.(AB)^\dagger = B^\dagger A^\dagger.

Consequently,

[A,B]†=−[A†,B†],{A,B}†={A†,B†}.\begin{aligned} [A,B]^\dagger &= -[A^\dagger,B^\dagger], \\ \{A,B\}^\dagger &= \{A^\dagger,B^\dagger\}. \end{aligned}

For Hermitian matrices A,BA,B, the commutator is anti-Hermitian and i[A,B]i[A,B] is Hermitian. For unbounded operators, generally B†A†⊆(AB)†B^\dagger A^\dagger\subseteq(AB)^\dagger rather than equality. A common invariant domain can make i[A,B]i[A,B] symmetric there, but self-adjointness still requires a domain argument.

For a unitary UU,

(U†AU)†=U†A†U,[U†AU,U†BU]=U†[A,B]U.\begin{aligned} (U^\dagger A U)^\dagger &= U^\dagger A^\dagger U, \\ [U^\dagger A U,U^\dagger B U] &= U^\dagger[A,B]U. \end{aligned}

Unitary changes of representation preserve spectra, products, commutators, and Hermiticity when all transformed domains are carried along.

Linearity and antisymmetry give

[A,αB+βC]=α[A,B]+β[A,C],[A,B]=−[B,A].\begin{aligned} [A,\alpha B+\beta C] &= \alpha[A,B]+\beta[A,C], \\ [A,B] &= -[B,A]. \end{aligned}

The Leibniz rules are

[A,BC]=[A,B]C+B[A,C],[AB,C]=A[B,C]+[A,C]B.\begin{aligned} [A,BC] &= [A,B]C+B[A,C], \\ [AB,C] &= A[B,C]+[A,C]B. \end{aligned}

Two mixed commutator–anticommutator forms are especially useful for fermionic strings:

[A,BC]={A,B}C−B{A,C},[AB,C]=A{B,C}−{A,C}B.\begin{aligned} [A,BC] &= \{A,B\}C -B\{A,C\}, \\ [AB,C] &= A\{B,C\} -\{A,C\}B. \end{aligned}

They are exact associative-algebra identities; A,B,CA,B,C need not themselves obey canonical anticommutation relations.

The Jacobi identity is

0=[A,[B,C]]+[B,[C,A]]+[C,[A,B]].0 ={} [A,[B,C]] + [B,[C,A]] + [C,[A,B]].

For a positive integer nn,

[A,Bn]=∑r=0n−1Br[A,B]Bn−1−r.[A,B^n] = \sum_{r=0}^{n-1} B^r[A,B]B^{n-1-r}.

If [A,B][A,B] also commutes with BB, this reduces to

[A,Bn]=n[A,B]Bn−1.[A,B^n] = n[A,B]B^{n-1}.

The reduction is not valid merely because nn is large or because AA and BB have simple spectra.

For operators acting on two tensor factors,

[A⊗B,C⊗D]=12[A,C]⊗{B,D}+12{A,C}⊗[B,D][A\otimes B,C\otimes D] = \frac12 [A,C]\otimes\{B,D\} + \frac12 \{A,C\}\otimes[B,D]

and

{A⊗B,C⊗D}=12{A,C}⊗{B,D}+12[A,C]⊗[B,D]\{A\otimes B,C\otimes D\} = \frac12 \{A,C\}\otimes\{B,D\} + \frac12 [A,C]\otimes[B,D]

If AA acts only on subsystem 1 and BB only on subsystem 2, then

[A⊗I,I⊗B]=0.[A\otimes I,I\otimes B] = 0.

This commuting-subsystem fact does not apply to spatially separated fermionic field operators represented in a graded tensor product without first declaring the parity convention.

For a parity-homogeneous operator AA, let ∣A∣=0|A|=0 for even parity and ∣A∣=1|A|=1 for odd parity. The graded commutator is

[A,B]g≡AB−(−1)∣A∣∣B∣BA.[A,B]_{\mathrm g} \equiv AB - (-1)^{|A||B|} BA.

It becomes an ordinary commutator if either operator is even and an anticommutator if both are odd. Its graded antisymmetry is

[A,B]g=−(−1)∣A∣∣B∣[B,A]g.[A,B]_{\mathrm g} = - (-1)^{|A||B|} [B,A]_{\mathrm g}.

For parity-homogeneous A,B,CA,B,C,

[A,BC]g=[A,B]gC+(−1)∣A∣∣B∣B[A,C]g.[A,BC]_{\mathrm g} = [A,B]_{\mathrm g}C + (-1)^{|A||B|} B[A,C]_{\mathrm g}.

The graded bracket is the natural algebraic tool for canonical fermion generators. Physical Hamiltonians and observables are usually even, so their dynamics is still written with the ordinary commutator.

Define

ad⁡A(B)≡[A,B].\operatorname{ad}_A(B) \equiv [A,B].

The Hadamard lemma is

eABe−A=ead⁡AB=∑n=0∞1n!ad⁡An(B).\begin{aligned} e^A B e^{-A} &= e^{\operatorname{ad}_A}B \\ &= \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{1}{n!} \operatorname{ad}_A^n(B). \end{aligned}

If

[A,B]=λB[A,B] = \lambda B

with scalar λ\lambda, then

eABe−A=eλB.e^A B e^{-A} = e^\lambda B.

If nested commutators terminate, the series is finite. Otherwise, convergence or a formal asymptotic interpretation must be supplied.

Near the identity, with the logarithm branch continuous from A=B=0A=B=0, the BCH series starts as

log⁡(eAeB)=A+B+12[A,B]+112[A,[A,B]]+112[B,[B,A]]+⋯ .\log(e^Ae^B) = A+B+\frac12[A,B] + \frac1{12}[A,[A,B]] + \frac1{12}[B,[B,A]] +\cdots .

If [A,B][A,B] commutes with both AA and BB, all higher nested commutators vanish and

eAeB=eA+B+12[A,B].e^Ae^B = e^{A+B+\frac12[A,B]}.

Use the canonical Baker–Campbell–Hausdorff page for convergence, product formulas, displacement operators, and time-ordering boundaries.

For a norm-differentiable bounded operator family A(λ)A(\lambda),

ddλeA(λ)=∫01ds e(1−s)A×dAdλesA.\frac{d}{d\lambda}e^{A(\lambda)} = \int_0^1 ds\, e^{(1-s)A} \times \frac{dA}{d\lambda} e^{sA}.

If [A,dA/dλ]=0[A,dA/d\lambda]=0, the scalar-looking rule is recovered:

ddλeA=dAdλeA.\frac{d}{d\lambda}e^A = \frac{dA}{d\lambda}e^A.

Without that commutator condition, pulling dA/dλdA/d\lambda through the exponential is generally wrong.

Under trace-class conditions, cyclicity simplifies the derivative:

ddλTr⁡eA(λ)=Tr⁡[dAdλeA(λ)].\frac{d}{d\lambda} \operatorname{Tr}e^{A(\lambda)} = \operatorname{Tr} \left[ \frac{dA}{d\lambda} e^{A(\lambda)} \right].

This trace identity remains valid even when AA and dA/dλdA/d\lambda do not commute.

For finite matrices, or for AA trace class and BB bounded,

Tr⁡(AB)=Tr⁡(BA).\operatorname{Tr}(AB) = \operatorname{Tr}(BA).

The same cyclic identity holds if both factors are Hilbert–Schmidt. Hence, under these sufficient conditions,

Tr⁡[A,B]=0.\operatorname{Tr}[A,B] = 0.

More generally,

Tr⁡(U†AU)=Tr⁡A\operatorname{Tr} \left( U^\dagger A U \right) = \operatorname{Tr}A

for unitary UU and trace-class AA. A basis-independent trace can be evaluated in any complete orthonormal basis.

If a density operator is a function of the Hamiltonian,

ρ=f(H),\rho = f(H),

then [ρ,H]=0[\rho,H]=0 and

Tr⁡(ρ[H,A])=0\operatorname{Tr} \left( \rho[H,A] \right) = 0

whenever cyclicity is justified. More generally, [ρ,H]=0[\rho,H]=0 suffices; ρ=f(H)\rho=f(H) is not necessary, for example within a degenerate eigenspace. This expresses stationarity under the same time-independent Hamiltonian.

For two unbounded factors, merely asserting that both products are trace class does not justify cyclicity. Use a theorem whose domain hypotheses apply. Regularized traces are separate constructions and can contain boundary terms.

For an orthogonal projector,

P2=P=P†.P^2 = P = P^\dagger.

With Q=I−PQ=I-P,

Q2=Q,PQ=QP=0,P+Q=I.\begin{aligned} Q^2 &= Q, \\ PQ &= QP = 0, \\ P+Q &= I. \end{aligned}

Every operator decomposes as

A=PAP+PAQ+QAP+QAQ.A = PAP+PAQ+QAP+QAQ.

The subspaces are invariant under AA precisely when the off-diagonal blocks vanish:

[P,A]=0⟺PAQ=QAP=0.[P,A] = 0 \quad\Longleftrightarrow\quad PAQ = QAP = 0.

In general, projecting a product differs from multiplying projected operators:

PABP−(PAP)(PBP)=PAQBP.PABP-(PAP)(PBP)=PAQBP.

The right side describes intermediate states discarded by PP. This is why projecting an observable such as A2A^2 cannot usually be replaced by squaring PAPPAP.

Use the convention

RA(z)≡(z−A)−1.R_A(z) \equiv (z-A)^{-1}.

For zz in the resolvent sets of AA and BB,

RA(z)−RB(z)=RA(z)(A−B)RB(z).R_A(z)-R_B(z) = R_A(z)(A-B)R_B(z).

For one operator evaluated at two spectral parameters,

RA(z)−RA(w)=(w−z)RA(z,w),RA(z,w)≡RA(z)RA(w).\begin{aligned} R_A(z)-R_A(w) &= (w-z) \mathcal R_A(z,w), \\ \mathcal R_A(z,w) &\equiv R_A(z)R_A(w). \end{aligned}

The derivative is

dRA(z)dz=−RA(z)2.\frac{dR_A(z)}{dz} = -R_A(z)^2.

If AA is self-adjoint,

RA(z)†=RA(z∗).R_A(z)^\dagger = R_A(z^\ast).

Sources that define (A−z)−1(A-z)^{-1} instead have corresponding sign changes. The Resolvent Operator explains spectral representations, poles, boundary values, and Green-function conventions.

The unified canonical relation implies

didj†=δij+ηdj†di.d_i d_j^\dagger = \delta_{ij} + \eta d_j^\dagger d_i.

Thus

bosonaiaj†=δij+aj†aifermioncicj†=δij−cj†ci\begin{array}{c|c} \text{boson} & a_i a_j^\dagger =\delta_{ij}+a_j^\dagger a_i \\ \text{fermion} & c_i c_j^\dagger =\delta_{ij}-c_j^\dagger c_i \end{array}

For one mode,

aa†=1+a†a,cc†=1−c†c.\begin{aligned} aa^\dagger &= 1+a^\dagger a, \\ cc^\dagger &= 1-c^\dagger c. \end{aligned}

The sign difference is exact and is the source of Bose enhancement versus Pauli exclusion in many elementary contractions.

Define

ni≡di†di,N^≡∑ini.n_i \equiv d_i^\dagger d_i, \qquad \widehat N \equiv \sum_i n_i.

For both bosons and fermions,

[ni,dj]=−δijdj,[ni,dj†]=δijdj†.\begin{aligned} [n_i,d_j] &= -\delta_{ij}d_j, \\ [n_i,d_j^\dagger] &= \delta_{ij}d_j^\dagger. \end{aligned}

Therefore,

[N^,dj]=−dj,[N^,dj†]=dj†.\begin{aligned} [\widehat N,d_j] &= -d_j, \\ [\widehat N,d_j^\dagger] &= d_j^\dagger. \end{aligned}

If Mp,qM_{p,q} is a monomial with pp creation and qq annihilation operators, then

[N^,Mp,q]=(p−q)Mp,q.[\widehat N,M_{p,q}] = (p-q)M_{p,q}.

This charge-counting identity holds without expanding every canonical swap. The canonical application guide is Number Operators and Conserved Quantities.

For a single mode with n=d†dn=d^\dagger d, polynomial identities give

f(n)d=d f(n−1),d f(n)=f(n+1)d,f(n)d†=d†f(n+1),d†f(n)=f(n−1)d†.\begin{aligned} f(n)d &= d\,f(n-1), \\ d\,f(n) &= f(n+1)d, \\ f(n)d^\dagger &= d^\dagger f(n+1), \\ d^\dagger f(n) &= f(n-1)d^\dagger. \end{aligned}

For bosons these identities act naturally on the finite-particle core. Expressions such as f(n−1)f(n-1) are interpreted through the polynomial or spectral identity, not as a claim that a physical state with occupation −1-1 exists.

The exponential special cases are

eλnd e−λn=e−λd,eλnd†e−λn=eλd†.\begin{aligned} e^{\lambda n}d\,e^{-\lambda n} &= e^{-\lambda}d, \\ e^{\lambda n}d^\dagger e^{-\lambda n} &= e^\lambda d^\dagger. \end{aligned}

For λ=−iθ\lambda=-i\theta, this is the U(1)U(1) phase rotation generated by number.

For one fermionic mode,

c2=(c†)2=0,n2=n.\begin{aligned} c^2 &= (c^\dagger)^2 = 0, \\ n^2 &= n. \end{aligned}

Thus nn is a projector with eigenvalues 00 and 11.

For one bosonic mode,

(a†)mam=n(n−1)⋯(n−m+1).(a^\dagger)^m a^m = n(n-1)\cdots(n-m+1).

In particular,

(a†)2a2=n(n−1),n2=(a†)2a2+n.\begin{aligned} (a^\dagger)^2a^2 &= n(n-1), \\ n^2 &= (a^\dagger)^2a^2+n. \end{aligned}

The extra nn is the contact term generated by commuting an annihilation operator through a creation operator. It is why n2n^2 and the normal-ordered pair-counting operator are not interchangeable for bosons.

Let

Eij≡di†dj.E_{ij} \equiv d_i^\dagger d_j.

For either canonical statistics,

[Eij,dk†]=δjkdi†,[Eij,dk]=−δikdj.\begin{aligned} [E_{ij},d_k^\dagger] &= \delta_{jk}d_i^\dagger, \\ [E_{ij},d_k] &= -\delta_{ik}d_j. \end{aligned}

The bilinears close under ordinary commutation:

[Eij,Ekl]=δjkEil−δilEkj.[E_{ij},E_{kl}] = \delta_{jk}E_{il} -\delta_{il}E_{kj}.

For one-body matrices AA and BB, define their second-quantized lifts

A^=∑i,jdi†Aijdj,B^=∑i,jdi†Bijdj.\widehat A = \sum_{i,j} d_i^\dagger A_{ij}d_j, \qquad \widehat B = \sum_{i,j} d_i^\dagger B_{ij}d_j.

Then

[A^,B^]=[A,B]^.[\widehat A,\widehat B] = \widehat{[A,B]}.

This identity explains why one-body symmetries lift to Fock space without a statistics-dependent sign. It assumes a common canonical basis and number-conserving bilinears; pairing operators obey a larger algebra.

For integer-valued total fermion number,

P≡(−1)N^=eiπN^.\mathcal P \equiv (-1)^{\widehat N} = e^{i\pi\widehat N}.

It obeys

P2=I,P†=P.\mathcal P^2 = I, \qquad \mathcal P^\dagger = \mathcal P.

Conjugation gives

PciP=−ci,Pci†P=−ci†.\begin{aligned} \mathcal P c_i\mathcal P &= -c_i, \\ \mathcal P c_i^\dagger\mathcal P &= -c_i^\dagger. \end{aligned}

Every even fermionic monomial commutes with P\mathcal P and every odd monomial anticommutes with it. Pairing Hamiltonians can break particle-number conservation while preserving fermion parity.

A number-conserving mode transformation

d~α=∑iUαidi\widetilde d_\alpha = \sum_i U_{\alpha i}d_i

preserves the canonical algebra when UU is unitary on the one-particle space:

UU†=U†U=I.UU^\dagger = U^\dagger U = I.

For a Bogoliubov transformation

γ=Ud+Vd†,\gamma = Ud+Vd^\dagger,

the compact canonical conditions in the η\eta convention are

UU†−ηVV†=I,UVT−ηVUT=0.\begin{aligned} UU^\dagger -\eta VV^\dagger &= I, \\ UV^{\mathsf T} -\eta VU^{\mathsf T} &= 0. \end{aligned}

For bosons, η=+1\eta=+1 gives the indefinite-metric minus sign. For fermions, η=−1\eta=-1 gives plus signs. These equations are necessary algebraic checks; stability, implementability in infinite volume, and vacuum choice require more. The canonical physical derivations live in Bogoliubov Theory and the fermionic quasiparticle pages.

For a periodic lattice of LL sites, one common unitary convention is

dj=1L∑keik⋅rjdk,dk=1L∑je−ik⋅rjdj.\begin{aligned} d_j &= \frac1{\sqrt L} \sum_k e^{i\mathbf k\cdot\mathbf r_j} d_{\mathbf k}, \\ d_{\mathbf k} &= \frac1{\sqrt L} \sum_j e^{-i\mathbf k\cdot\mathbf r_j} d_j. \end{aligned}

The completeness relations are

1L∑keik⋅(ri−rj)=δij,1L∑jei(k−q)⋅rj=δk,q.\begin{aligned} \frac1L\sum_k e^{i\mathbf k\cdot (\mathbf r_i-\mathbf r_j)} &= \delta_{ij}, \\ \frac1L\sum_j e^{i(\mathbf k-\mathbf q)\cdot \mathbf r_j} &= \delta_{\mathbf k,\mathbf q}. \end{aligned}

They guarantee that canonical (anti)commutators are preserved. Different sign and normalization conventions are equally valid but must be transformed consistently; see Fourier-Transform Conventions.

For Pauli matrices,

σaσb=δabI+i∑cϵabcσc.\sigma^a\sigma^b = \delta_{ab}I + i\sum_c \epsilon_{abc}\sigma^c.

Therefore,

[σa,σb]=2i∑cϵabcσc,{σa,σb}=2δabI.\begin{aligned} [\sigma^a,\sigma^b] &= 2i\sum_c \epsilon_{abc}\sigma^c, \\ \{\sigma^a,\sigma^b\} &= 2\delta_{ab}I. \end{aligned}

For ordinary three-vectors u,v\mathbf u,\mathbf v,

(u⋅σ)(v⋅σ)=(u⋅v)I+i(u×v)⋅σ.(\mathbf u\cdot\boldsymbol\sigma) (\mathbf v\cdot\boldsymbol\sigma) = (\mathbf u\cdot\mathbf v)I + i(\mathbf u\times\mathbf v) \cdot\boldsymbol\sigma.

The two-component completeness relation is

∑a=13(σa)αβ(σa)γδ=2δαδδβγ−δαβδγδ.\sum_{a=1}^3 (\sigma^a)_{\alpha\beta} (\sigma^a)_{\gamma\delta} = 2\delta_{\alpha\delta} \delta_{\beta\gamma} - \delta_{\alpha\beta} \delta_{\gamma\delta}.

This is the basic Pauli Fierz identity. Index order matters: exchanging two indices changes which bilinears are being rearranged. The Pauli Matrix Identity Index collects further spin-1/21/2 identities.

At one site, define

n=n↑+n↓,D=n↑n↓,S=12∑α,βcα†σαβcβ.\begin{aligned} n &= n_\uparrow+n_\downarrow, \\ D &= n_\uparrow n_\downarrow, \\ \mathbf S &= \frac12 \sum_{\alpha,\beta} c_\alpha^\dagger \boldsymbol\sigma_{\alpha\beta} c_\beta. \end{aligned}

Since nσ2=nσn_\sigma^2=n_\sigma,

n2=n+2D,n^2 = n+2D,

so

D=12(n2−n).D = \frac12 (n^2-n).

Here S\mathbf S is dimensionless; physical angular momentum is ℏS\hbar\mathbf S. The local spin Casimir is

S2=34(n−2D).\mathbf S^2 = \frac34 (n-2D).

These identities can be checked on the empty, spin-up, spin-down, and doubly occupied local states. They are exact for one spinful orbital; multiorbital Hund, orbital, and pair-hopping terms require a larger local algebra.

Let XiX_i be operators linear in canonical creation and annihilation operators, with vanishing one-point functions in a Gaussian state. For a fixed operator ordering, write

Cij≡⟨XiXj⟩.C_{ij} \equiv \langle X_iX_j\rangle.

Then the four-point function has the schematic Wick form

⟨X1X2X3X4⟩=C12C34+ηC13C24+C14C23.\langle X_1X_2X_3X_4\rangle = C_{12}C_{34} + \eta C_{13}C_{24} + C_{14}C_{23}.

For bosons, η=+1\eta=+1 and all pairings carry plus signs. For fermions, η=−1\eta=-1 gives the crossing-pair minus sign. Nonzero means, anomalous contractions, time ordering, contour ordering, and reference-state conventions modify what is called a contraction, not the underlying parity bookkeeping.

This factorization is not valid for a generic interacting state or a finite fixed-number thermal mixture merely because its Hamiltonian is quadratic. Gaussianity is a property of the state. Use Wick’s Theorem Preview and Normal Ordering in Many-Body QM for the canonical assumptions and extensions.

Prove

[A,BC]={A,B}C−B{A,C}[A,BC] = \{A,B\}C -B\{A,C\}

directly from the definitions.

Solution

Expand the right-hand side:

X≡{A,B}C−B{A,C},X=(AB+BA)C−B(AC+CA)=ABC+BAC−BAC−BCA=ABC−BCA=[A,BC].\begin{aligned} X &\equiv \{A,B\}C-B\{A,C\}, \\ X &= (AB+BA)C - B(AC+CA) \\ &= ABC+BAC - BAC-BCA \\ &= ABC-BCA \\ &= [A,BC]. \end{aligned}

No statistics assumption was used. The identity follows only from associativity and the definitions of the two brackets.

For canonical bosons or fermions, derive

Eij≡di†dj,[Eij,Ekl]=δjkEil−δilEkj.\begin{aligned} E_{ij} &\equiv d_i^\dagger d_j, \\ [E_{ij},E_{kl}] &= \delta_{jk}E_{il} -\delta_{il}E_{kj}. \end{aligned}
Solution

First use the canonical algebra to establish the statistics-independent identities

[Eij,dk†]=δjkdi†,[Eij,dl]=−δildj.\begin{aligned} [E_{ij},d_k^\dagger] &= \delta_{jk}d_i^\dagger, \\ [E_{ij},d_l] &= -\delta_{il}d_j. \end{aligned}

Then apply the ordinary Leibniz rule:

[Eij,Ekl]=[Eij,dk†]dl+dk†[Eij,dl]=δjkdi†dl−δildk†dj=δjkEil−δilEkj.\begin{aligned} [E_{ij},E_{kl}] &= [E_{ij},d_k^\dagger]d_l + d_k^\dagger[E_{ij},d_l] \\ &= \delta_{jk}d_i^\dagger d_l -\delta_{il}d_k^\dagger d_j \\ &= \delta_{jk}E_{il} -\delta_{il}E_{kj}. \end{aligned}

The result is the same for bosons and fermions because each EijE_{ij} has even fermion parity.

3. Reduce the local Hubbard double occupancy

Section titled “3. Reduce the local Hubbard double occupancy”

For one spinful fermion orbital, prove

n=n↑+n↓,D=n↑n↓=12(n2−n).\begin{aligned} n &= n_\uparrow+n_\downarrow, \\ D &= n_\uparrow n_\downarrow \\ &= \frac12(n^2-n). \end{aligned}
Solution

Expand the square:

n2=n↑2+n↓2+n↑n↓+n↓n↑.n^2 = n_\uparrow^2 +n_\downarrow^2 + n_\uparrow n_\downarrow +n_\downarrow n_\uparrow.

The two number operators commute, and each is a projector:

nσ2=nσ.n_\sigma^2 = n_\sigma.

Therefore

n2=n+2n↑n↓,n^2 = n+2n_\uparrow n_\downarrow,

which rearranges to the desired result.

On the four local basis states, both sides have eigenvalues 0,0,0,10,0,0,1 for empty, spin-up, spin-down, and double occupancy.

With RA(z)=(z−A)−1R_A(z)=(z-A)^{-1} and RB(z)=(z−B)−1R_B(z)=(z-B)^{-1}, prove

RA(z)−RB(z)=RA(z)(A−B)RB(z).R_A(z)-R_B(z) = R_A(z)(A-B)R_B(z).
Solution

Insert the inverse factors on both sides:

RA−RB=RA(z−B)RB−RA(z−A)RB=RA(A−B)RB.\begin{aligned} R_A-R_B &= R_A(z-B)R_B - R_A(z-A)R_B \\ &= R_A(A-B)R_B. \end{aligned}

The identity requires zz to lie in both resolvent sets. If the convention (A−z)−1(A-z)^{-1} is used instead, the corresponding sign arrangement must be rederived rather than copied.

  • A. Altland and B. Simons, Condensed Matter Field Theory, 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press (2010) — fermionic and bosonic Gaussian algebras, symmetries, and field-theory conventions.
  • H. Bruus and K. Flensberg, Many-Body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics, Oxford University Press (2004) — operator methods, Fock-space identities, and response calculations.
  • A. L. Fetter and J. D. Walecka, Quantum Theory of Many-Particle Systems, Dover (2003) — canonical many-body operators, Green functions, and diagrammatic algebra.
  • B. C. Hall, Lie Groups, Lie Algebras, and Representations, 2nd ed., Springer (2015), doi:10.1007/978-3-319-13467-3 — exponentials, adjoint actions, BCH, and Lie-algebra identities.
  • J. W. Negele and H. Orland, Quantum Many-Particle Systems, Westview Press (1998) — second quantization, coherent states, Wick expansion, and thermal methods.
  • M. Reed and B. Simon, Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics, Vol. I: Functional Analysis, revised and enlarged ed., Academic Press (1980) — domains, adjoints, traces, spectral theory, and resolvents.