Arxiv:1906.04243V2 [Cond-Mat.Str-El]

arXiv:1906.04243v2 [cond-mat.str-el] 27 Nov 2019 s.Tedsdatg sisepnienmrclcost, numerical expensive its inter- is is of disadvantage which observables The physical of est. values expectation the e stmee yteflwtm fteantiholomorphic the of time flow the by tempered sign sys- is the the tem both where simultaneously, tame problems to method multimodal [14] thimble and in the proposed Lefschetz of thus multimodality was tempered the (TLTM) The of rele- care are take distribution. thimbles to needs multiple one When vant, determinant. cobian h atri eeal refo h rn convergence wrong the from free [16–19]. problem generally problem is convergence latter wrong The so-called the from aeu nta ti eaieyfs ihcomputational with fast relatively is advan- it its cost is that has former in algorithm The each tageous disadvantage. stage, the and in- reduce this advantage to own At the the as so deforms in oscillation. space latter complex defined phase the the weight in while region positive tegration Boltz- space, real complex complex a the whole by replace weight to mann attempts for- the algorithm different; mer fairly in- are com- of methodologies of continuation their use analytic tegrands, thimbles and make variables Lefschetz algorithms of the other the plexification utilizing the both Although and algorithms of [5], [6–15]. method class action; Langevin a complex complex is generically with the systems to is for one candidates problem sign potential the solve as attention taken theories. simulations field numerical quantum the real-time quantum and of of [2–4], calculations systems (QMC) of statistical Carlo [1], fields QCD Monte density various quantum finite include in examples Typical calculations physics. numerical performing ∗ ‡ † pligtetmee esht hml ehdt h Hubba the to method thimble Lefschetz tempered the Applying [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] mn ait fapoce,toagrtm have algorithms two approaches, of variety a Among when obstacles major the of one is problem sign The O ( N if O ( ) ( nyasnl hml srlvn nevaluating in relevant is thimble single a only N N ge ieywt xc values. small exact of with Ca lattice nicely Monte two-dimensional quantum agree a the on to of half-filling value it from sim sufficiency apply away expectation we the problems well, works the and multimodal algorithm equilibrium that this and fl global so gradient sign ensuring algorithm the the criterion of the both time develop tame flow further the to uses expected It is problem. sign numerical 3 h ere ffedm,bti suffers it but freedom), of degrees the : h eprdLfceztibemto saparallel-temper a is method thimble Lefschetz tempered The eas ftene ocluaeteJa- the calculate to need the of because ) .INTRODUCTION I. aauiFukuma, Masafumi 1 eateto hsc,KooUiest,Koo6680,J 606-8502, Kyoto University, Kyoto Physics, of Department 2 rcwtrosCoesArt L,Oeah akBuildin Park Otemachi LLC, Aarata PricewaterhouseCoopers -- tmci hyd-u oy 0-04 Japan 100-0004, Tokyo Chiyoda-ku, Otemachi, 1-1-1 1, ∗ ouuiMatsumoto, Nobuyuki half-filling a enrpre.I hsppr ecnie two- a consider size we of paper, lattice this square In and periodic study), dimensional reported. recent thimbles been multiple for from has contributions 24] the several [23, of relevance by also the considered (see been [20–22] already groups has model Hubbard half-filling. from away simulation this model QMC that the Hubbard to demonstrate the it To should of apply values times. we expectation flow well, key works all the algorithm The for that same fact size. the the sample be of the use of the equi- sufficiency is global the of ensuring and estimation criterion librium precise a the with allows values which expectation algorithm an idea). ing similar a for [15] also (see flow gradient ihteivretmeauedcmoe to decomposed temperature inverse the with hc lostepeieetmto fepcainvalues expectation of estimation algorithm precise new the a give allows we which [14], TLTM the reviewing briefly III). section Hubbard-Stratonovich in of thimble discussions type Lefschetz (see different variables the a than with methods methods other to resort can oee,tetmoa iecniee eei tl small still is here above. stated considered ( as size TLTM temporal the prob- by the multimodal solved However, and be con- can seriously sign which to the se- lems, needs between one actually dilemma and is a below, problem sider see will sign we the as vere There a to action. leads a complex that apply consider variable exclusively to Hubbard- Hubbard-Stratonovich we order Gaussian the method, in thimble Hubbard of paper, Lefschetz choice the this the In the of variables. on simulation Stratonovich heavily QMC depends the model in problem sign re- problems. simultaneously multimodal values, and sign exact results the with give solving nicely estimation) agree precise for that algorithm with above combined the the tempering that show of We implementation values. (the TLTM some with to potential fixed chemical parameters the values other of expectation functions as the observables evaluate of numerically and pieces, N h plcto fLfceztibemtost the to methods thimble Lefschetz of application The propos- TLTM, the develop further we paper, this In hsppri raie sflos nscinI after II section In follows. as organized is paper This ecmetta h xeto eiuns fthe of seriousness of extent the that comment We τ ) n o uhahg eprtr eieone regime temperature high a such for and 5), = ie n hwta h ueia results numerical the that show and size, h apesz.T eosrt that demonstrate To size. sample the 1, a eetmtdpeieywt a with precisely estimated be can s † l iuaino h ubr model Hubbard the of simulation rlo n loih oad ovn the solving towards algorithm ing wa eprn aaee and parameter tempering a as ow n ay Umeda Naoya and laeul.I hsppr we paper, this In ultaneously. apan g, dmdlaa from away model rd 2, ‡ N s N 2 = τ 5 = × 2 2 with a criterion ensuring global equilibrium and the suf- with H(z) (∂i∂j S(z)). Under the flow (2), the ac- ficiency of the sample size. This algorithm is applied to ≡ 2 tion changes as (d/dt)S(zt(x)) = ∂iS(zt(x)) 0, and the Hubbard model in section III, and we discuss about ≥ thus Re S(zt(x)) increases except at the critical points the obtained numerical results. We there also make a z (∂iS(z ) = 0), while Im S(zt(x)) is kept constant. In comment on the sign averages obtained by other meth- particular,∗ ∗ in the limit t , the deformed region will ods. Section IV is devoted to conclusion and outlook. approach a union of N-dimensional→ ∞ submanifolds (Lef- Five appendices are given for more detailed discussions schetz thimbles) on each of which Im S(z) is constant, on various topics. and thus the sign problem is expected to disappear there (except for a possible residual sign problem arising from the phase of the complex measure dz and a possible global II. TEMPERED LEFSCHETZ THIMBLE sign problem caused by phase cancellations among differ- METHOD ent thimbles). However, in the Monte Carlo calculation one cannot take the t limit na¨ıvely, because the Let x = (xi) RN be a real N-dimensional dynamical potential barriers between→ ∞ different thimbles become in- ∈ variable with action S(x) which may take complex values. finitely high so that the whole configuration space cannot Our main concern is to estimate the expectation values be explored sufficiently. This multimodality of distribution makes the Monte Carlo calculation impractical, es- S(x) N dx e− (x) R O pecially when contributions from more than one thimble (x) S S(x) . (1) hO i ≡ R RN dx e− are relevant to estimating expectation values. A key pro- R posal in [12] is to use a finite value of flow time that S(z) S(z) We assume that e− and e− (z) are entire func- is large enough to avoid the sign problem but simulta- tions over CN when x is complexifiedO to z = (zi) CN . neously is not too large so that the exploration in the Then, due to Cauchy’s theorem for higher dimensions,∈ configuration space is still possible. However, it is a dif- the right-hand side does not change under continuous de- ficult task to find such value of flow time in a systematic formations of the integration region as long as the bound- way, as we will discuss at the end of section III and in ary at infinity is kept fixed so that the integrals converge. Appendix E. The sign problem will get reduced if Im S(z) is almost The TLTM [14] is a tempering algorithm that uses the constant on the new integration region. flow time as a tempering parameter. There, the global In [11–15] such a deformation x zt(x) (t 0) is relaxation of the multimodal distribution is prompted by made according to the antiholomorphic→ gradient≥ flow: enabling configurations around different modes to easily communicate through transitions in ensembles at smaller i i i z˙t = [∂iS(zt)]∗, zt=0 = x . (2) flow times. Among other possible tempering algorithms, the parallel tempering algorithm [25, 26] (also known as Equation (1) can then be rewritten as the replica exchange MCMC method; see [27] for a review) is adopted in the TLTM [14] because it does not S(z) Σ dz e− (z) need to introduce the probability weight factors of ensem- (x) = t O (Σ z (RN )), (3) hO iS R dz e S(z) t ≡ t bles at various flow times and because most of relevant Σt − R steps can be done in parallel processes. which can be further rewritten as a ratio of reweighted In the TLTM (see Appendix A for the summary of N integrals over R by using the Jacobian matrix Jt(x) the algorithm), we first fix the maximum flow time T i j ≡ ∂zt(x)/∂x [11]: which should be sufficiently large such that the sign problem is reduced there. A possible criterion is that the S(z (x)) iθT (x) t sign average e eff is O(1) in the absence of tem- RN dx detJt(x) e− (zt(x)) ST (x) S = O |h i | S(zt(x)) pering. This process can be carried out by a test run hO i R RN dx detJt(x) e− with small statistics. We then enlarge the configura- iθt(Rx) e (zt(x)) eff RN O St tion space from = x to the set of A + 1 repli- = . (4) N A+1 { } iθt(x) R e eff cas, ( ) = (x0, x1,...,xA) . We assign to repli- St { } cas a (a = 0, 1,...,A) the flow times ta with t0 = 0 < eff eff t < < t = T . The action at replica a, S (x ), Here, S (x) and θ (x) are defined by 1 A ta a t t is obtained··· by solving (2) and (7) with its own initial eff i i S (x) Re S(zt(x)) conditions zt=0 = xa, Jt=0 = 11. We set up an irre- e− t e− det J (x) , (5) ≡ | t | ducible, aperiodic Markov chain for the enlarged config- iθt(x) i Im S(zt(x)) i arg det Jt(x) e e− e , (6) uration space such that the probability distribution for ≡ (x , x ,...,x ) eventually approaches the equilibrium { 0 1 A } and Jt(x) obeys the following differential equation [11] distribution proportional to (see also footnote 2 of [14]): eff exp[ Sta (xa)]. (8) J˙ = [H(z (x)) J ]∗, J =11 (7) − t t · t t=0 Ya 3

This can be realized by combining (a) the Metropo- ta is a linear function of a when flowed configurations lis algorithm (or the Hybrid Monte Carlo algorithm) are close to a critical point. This is because the opti- in the x direction at each fixed flow time and (b) the mal choice for the overall coefficients in tempering al- swap of configurations at two adjacent replicas. Each gorithms is exponential (see, e.g., [28, 29]) and because of the steps (a) and (b) can be done in parallel pro- the real part of the action grows exponentially in flow cesses. After the system is well relaxed to global time near critical points. Finally, the computational cost 3 4 equilibrium, we estimate the expectation value at flow in the TLTM is expected to be O(N − ) due to the in- time ta [see (4)] by using the subsample at replica a, crease caused by the tempering algorithm (which will be (k) 0 1 O(N − )). Note that this growth of computational cost xa k=1,2,...,Nconf , that is retrieved from the total sam- { } (k) (k) (k) can be compensated by increasing the number of parallel ple (x , x ,...,x ) : { 0 1 A }k=1,2,...,Nconf processes. iθta (x) e (zta (x)) Seff O ta

iθta (x) e eff III. APPLICATION TO THE HUBBARD Sta MODEL AWAY FROM HALF-FILLING Nconf (k) (k) k=1 exp[iθta (xa )] (zta (xa )) ≈ O ¯a. (9) P Nconf (k) ≡ O k=1 exp[iθta (xa )] Let Λ = x be a d-dimensional lattice with Ns lattice points.{ The} Hubbard model describes nonrelativistic The original proposalP in [14] is to use (9) at the maximum lattice fermions of spin one-half, and is defined by the flow time, ¯ , as an estimate of . a=A S Hamiltonian (including the chemical potential) Recall hereO that the left-hand sidehOi of (9) is independent of a due to Cauchy’s theorem, and thus the ra- ¯ H = κ Kxy cx† ,σcy,σ µ (nx, + nx, 1) tio a should yield the same value within the statisti- − − ↑ ↓ − cal errorO margin if the system is well in global equilib- Xx,y Xσ Xx rium. In practice, this is not true for small a’s due to + U (nx, 1/2) (nx, 1/2). (10) ↑ − ↓ − the sign problem, where the estimate of the sign average, Xx (k) iθ iθt (x ) e ta (1/Nconf) e a a , can be smaller than ≡ k Here, c and c are the annihilation and creation its statistical error (P1/√2N ; the value for the uni- x,σ x† ,σ ≃ conf operators on site x Λ with spin σ (= , ) obeying form distribution of phases). In this case, the statistical ∈ ↑ ↓ ¯ the anticommutation relations cx,σ,cy† ,τ = δxy δστ and error of the ratio a cannot be trusted, which means that { } ¯ O cx,σ,cy,τ = c† ,c† = 0, and nx,σ c† cx,σ. Kxy such a should not be used as an estimate of S . { } { x,σ y,τ } ≡ x,σ BasedO on the observation above, we now proposehOi an is the adjacency matrix that takes a nonvanishing value ( 1) only for nearest neighbors, and we assume the algorithm which allows a precise estimation of S with ≡ a criterion ensuring global equilibrium andhOi the suffi- lattice to be bipartite. κ (> 0) is the hopping param- ciency of the sample size. First, we continue the sam- eter, µ is the chemical potential, and U (> 0) represents pling until we find some range of a (to be denoted by the strength of the on-site repulsive potential. We have iθ shifted nx,σ as nx,σ nx,σ 1/2 so that µ = 0 corre- a = amin,...,amax(= A)) in which e ta are well above → − sponds to the half-filling state, σ nx,σ 1/2 = 0. 1/√2Nconf and ¯a take the same value within the statis- h − i βH O We approximate the grand partitionP function tr e− tical error margin. We will require that the 1σ intervals by using the Trotter decomposition with equal spacing around eiθta be above 3/√2N . Then, we estimate conf ǫ (β = Nτ ǫ), and rewrite it as a path integral over by using the χ2 fit for ¯ with a hOiS {Oa}a=amin,...,amax a Gaussian Hubbard-Stratonovich variable φ = (φℓ,x). constant function of a. Global equilibrium and the suf- Then the expectation value of the number density n ficiency of the sample size are checked by looking at the ≡ (1/Ns) x(nx, +nx, 1) is expressed as (see Appendix 2 2 ↑ ↓ − optimized value of χ /DOF = χ /(amax amin). Note B for theP derivation) that the parameters determined by this procedure− (such S[φ] as Nconf, amin, amax = A) can vary depending on the [dφ] e− n[φ] n [dφ] dφ x , (11) choice of observable . h iS ≡ R [dφ] e S[φ] ≡ ℓ, We close this sectionO with a few comments. First, in − Yℓ,x R S[φ] (1/2) P φ2 a b the TLTM a sufficient overlap of the distributions at adja- e− e− ℓ,x ℓ,x det M [φ] det M [φ], (12) cent replicas is expected even for large flow times as long ≡ a/b βµ ǫκK i√ǫUφℓ as the spacings are not too large. This is because the M [φ] 11+ e± e e± , (13) ≡ eff Yℓ distributions at large a’s ( exp[ Sta (x)]) have peaks RN ∝ − 1 at the same points in that flow to critical points in n[φ] (i√ǫUNs)− φℓ=0,x, (14) N ≡ C . This is in sharp contrast with the situation in other Xx tempered systems, where the distribution often changes rapidly as a function of the tempering parameter so that where φℓ (φℓ,x δxy) and is a product in descend- ≡ ℓ an enough overlap cannot be achieved for realistically ing order. Note that n[φ]Q in (14) can be replaced by √ 1 meaningful small spacings. Second, the optimal form of (i ǫUNτ Ns)− ℓ,x φℓ,x, which is more preferable in P 4

Monte Carlo calculations because statistical errors will values T/(βµ)=1/12–1/10, A = 8–12, Nconf = 5, 000– be reduced due to the averaging over ℓ. The charge- 25, 000, varying on the value of βµ. We make a sampling charge correlation, nx ny S (nx nx, + nx, 1), can after discarding 5,000 conﬁgurations, and from the ob- h i ≡ ↑ ↓ − also be evaluated as a path integral by simply replacing tained data n¯a a=amin,...,amax we estimate n S by using 1 2 { } h i nx by (i√ǫU)− φ x when x = y. As for the observ- the χ ﬁt. ℓ=0, 6 ables that are not directly constructed from nx, the ex- As an example, let us see Fig. 2, which shows eiθta pectation values can be evaluated by using the formula andn ¯a at various replicas for βµ = 5. The left panel (B14). i θt |e a | na We now apply the TLTM to the Hubbard model on 0.14 0.30

● a two-dimensional periodic square lattice of size 2 2 0.12 ● w/ tempering 0.25 ● × ● (thus N = 4) with N = 5. We first estimate n 0.10 / s τ S 3 2 Nconf 0.20 ● ● ● h i 0.08 ● ● numerically by using the expressions (11)–(14) for various 0.15 0.06 ● ● w/ tempering values of βµ with other parameters fixed to be βκ = 3, ● 0.10 0.04 ● estimated value ● σ βU = 13. Note that the physical quantities depend only 0.02 ● 0.05 1 interval ● ● ● exact value 0.00 0.00 ● ● on the dimensionless parameters βµ, βκ, βU for fixed 0 2 4 6 8 10 a 0 2 4 6 8 10 a Nτ . The complex action (12) gives rise to a serious sign FIG. 2. With tempering (βµ = 5). (Left) the sign aver- problem, as can be seen in the left panel of Fig. 1. How- ages at various replicas. The horizontal dashed line represents 3/√2Nconf = 0.017. (Right) the datan ¯a. The solid red line sign average with a shaded band represents the estimate of n S with 1σ 1.0 sign average h i 1.000 interval. The gray dashed line represents the exact value. 0.8 0.6 0.995 iθta 0.4 0.990 shows that the 1σ intervals around e are above 3/√2N for a = 5,..., 11 (and thus we set a = 5 0.2 0.985 conf min and amax = 11). The right panel shows that the data 0.0 0.980 0 5 10 15 βμ 0 5 10 15 βμ n¯a in this range give the same value within the statis- { } 2 tical error margin. The χ fit gives the estimate n S FIG. 1. (Left) the sign averages obtained by the reweighting 0.221 0.012 (exact value: 0.212) with χ2/DOF =h 0i.45.≈ method (flow time T = 0) for the complex action (12) with the Figure± 3 shows the thus-obtained numerical estimates Gaussian Hubbard-Stratonovich variable. (Right) the sign of n S as a function of βµ. We also display the estimates averages obtained by using ALF with the Mz parametrization. h i 〈n〉 ever, we should note that the extent of the seriousness ◆ 1.0 ◆ w/ tempering (T>0) ◆ of the sign problem heavily depends on the choice of w/o tempering (T>0) ◆ the Hubbard-Stratonovich variables, and actually, the ( = ) ◆ 0.8 reweighting T 0 sign problem can be avoided for the above parameters exact values ◆ ◆ within the BSS (Blankenbecler, Scalapino and Sugar)- exact values (Nτ=∞) QMC method [30]. In fact, the right panel of Fig. 1 shows 0.6 ◆ the sign averages calculated by using a public code called ◆ ◆ ALF (Algorithms for Lattice Fermions) [31] that is based ◆ 0.4 on the discrete variables introduced in [32, 33]. We see ◆ that the sign averages are above 0.98 for all the range of ◆ βµ studied here.1 0.2 Following the general prescription and writing x = ◆ i ◆ (x ) = (φℓ,x) (i = 1,...,N) with N = Nτ Ns, we in- 0.0 ◆ ◆ troduce the enlarged configuration space (RN )A+1 = 0 5 10 15 βμ (x0, x1,...,xA) . We here brief the setup of the parameters{ relevant to} the TLTM (see Appendix D for more FIG. 3. The expectation values of the number density op- details). We set ta to be piecewise linear in a with a erator, n S (Nτ = 5). The results obtained with tempering single breakpoint whose position will be tuned such that correctlyh reproducei the exact values. The exact values for the acceptance rates of the swapping process at adjacent Nτ = are also displayed for comparison. replicas are almost the same for all pairs (being roughly ∞ 2 above 40%). For each value of βµ, we make a test run obtained without tempering (at the same maximum flow with small statistics to adjust parameters. This gives the

deformed region reaches the vicinity of all the relevant Lefschetz 1 We thank a referee for suggesting us to investigate this point. thimbles at almost the same flow time and such a linear form is 2 This functional form of ta is best suited to the case where the effective also for the transient period. 5 times T ) and those from the original reweighting method of n S almost agree between the two methods with and (i.e. T = 0), together with the values obtained by the withouth i tempering in the range 7 βµ 9. This means explicit evaluation of the trace under the Trotter decom- that the operator n is not sensitive≤ to≤ the multimodal- position with Nτ = 5 and for the continuum imaginary ity in this range. To find an observable that is sensitive time (i.e. N = ) (see Appendix C). We see that the ex- to the multimodality, we estimated the nearest-neighbor τ ∞ act values are correctly reproduced when the tempering is charge-charge correlation nx ny S with the same sam- implemented, while there are significant deviations when ple.3 The results are shownh ini Fig. 6, where we see a not implemented. As in the (0 + 1)-dimensional mas- significant discrepancy at βµ = 9 between the two meth- sive Thirring model [14], the deviation reflects the fact ods. that the relevant thimbles are not sampled sufficiently. In fact, from Fig. 4, which shows the distribution of av- 〈nx ny〉 i eraged flowed configurationsz ˆ (1/N) i zT at T =0.5 1.0 ◆ w/ tempering (T>0) ◆ ≡ ◆ for βµ = 5, we see that, although the flowedP configura- w/o tempering (T>0) reweighting (T=0) ◆ 0.5  0.5  0.8

● ●

Im ● Im exact values z ● ● z ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ●● ●● ●● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●● ● ● ●● ●● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●● ●●●●● ● ● ●● ● ●● ● ● ●●● ● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ●●● ● ●●●● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ●●●● ●● ●● ● ●● ●● ● ● ● ●● ●● ● ●●●●● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ●● ●● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●● ● ● ●●●●● ●● ● ●●● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ●●●●●● ●● ●● ● ●●● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ●● ● ● ● ●● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ●● ●● ● ● ●● ●●●● ●● ● ●● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ●● ●● ●●● ● ●●●● ● ● ●●● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●● ●●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ●● ● ●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ●●● ●●●● ●●●●● ● ●●● ●● ●●●●●●● ● ●● ●●●● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●●●● ● ●●●●● ●●●●●●● ●●●●● ●●●●● ● ●●●●●●●●● ● ● ●● ●●● ●●●●●● ● ●● ●●●● ●●●●●● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●● ● ● ●● ●● ● ●●● ●● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● ●●● ● ● ●● ●●●● ●● ●●● ●●●● ●●●● ●●●●●●●●● ● ●●● ●●●●●●● ● ●●●●●● ●●●●●● ● ●●●●● ●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ●● ●●● ●●● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●●●● ●●● ●● ●●● ● ● 0.4 ● ● ● ● ●●● ● ● ●● ●●● ●●●●●● ●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●● ●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●● ●●● ●●● ●● ● ●●● ●●●●●● ●●● ● ●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ●● ●●●●●●● ● ● ● ● ●● ● 0.4 ● ● ●●● ●● ● ●●●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ●●●●●● ●●● ● ●● ●●●●●●●●● ● ● ●●● ● ● ●● ●●●●●●●●●● ●●●● ● ●●●●● ●● ●●● ●●●●●● ●● ●● ●● ● ● ● ● ●●● ●● ● ●●● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ●●● ●●●●● ●●● ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●● ●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●● ●●●●●● ● ●●●●●●●● ●●● ● ●● ● ● ● ●●● ● ● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● ●● ●●●● ●●● ● ●●●● ●●● ●●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ●● ●●●● ● ●●●● ●● ●● ●●●●●●● ●●●●● ●●●●● ● ●●●● ●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●● ●●●●● ●● ●●●●● ●●● ●●●● ●● ● ●● ● ●● ●●● ●● ● ● ● ●● ●●●●●●● ●●●●●●● ●●● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●● ● ●●●● ● ●●● ● ◆ ● ● ● ●●●●● ● ● ● ●●● ●●● ●● ● ●● ● ●● ●● ●●● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ●●●● ● ● ● ●● ● ●●● ●● ● ●● ● ●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●● ● ●●●●●●●●● ●●● ●●●●●●●● ● ●●●●●● ●●● ● ●●●●●● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●● ●●●●● ● ● ●● ●● ● ●●● ●●● ●● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●● ●●●●●●● ●● ●● ●●●● ●● ●●● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● ●●● ● ●● ● ● ● ●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●● ●● ● ●● ●● ● ●● ● ●● ● ● ●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ●●● ●●● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●● ●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●● ● ●●●●●●● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●● ● ( = ) ● ● ●● ● ● ●●● ●●●●●● ●●●●● ●●●●●●● ●●●●●● ● ●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●● ●● ●●●●● ●●●● ● ● ●● ● ● ●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●● ●●●●●● ● ∞ ● ● ●●● ● ●● ●●● ● ●●●●●●●●● ● ●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ●● ●●● ●●●● ●●●● ●● ● ● ●● ● ●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ● exact values N ● ● ● ●● ●●● ● ● ●●● ●●●●●● ● ● ●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●● ●●●●●●●●● ● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ●●●●● ●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●● ●●●● ●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ●●● ●● ● ●● ● τ ● ● ● ●●● ●● ● ● ●● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● ●●● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ●● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ●●●●●● ● ● ● ●●●●●● ●● ●● ●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●● ●●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ●●● ● ●●●●●●●●● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●● ●●●●● ●● ● ● ●● ●●● ●● ● ●●● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●● ●●● ●● ● ● ● ●●● ● ●●● ●● ●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●● ●●●●● ●● ● ●● ● ● ● ●● ● ●● ● ● ●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ●●● ●● ●● ● ●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●● ●●●●● ● ●●●●●●●● ● ● ●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ● ●● ●● ●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●● ● ●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●● ●●● ●●●● ●●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ● ●● ●● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●● ●● ● ●● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●● ●●●● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ●●●●● ●● ●●●●●●● ●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●● ●●● ●●● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●● ● ● ●●● ●● ●● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●● ●●● ● ●●●● ●● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ●● ●● ●● ●●● ● ●●●● ●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●● ● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ● ●●● ● ● ●● ●● ●●● ●●● ●●● ●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●● ●●●● ●● ●●● ●● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ●●● ● ●●●●●●● ●●●●● ● ● ● ● ●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●● ● ●● ●● ● ●●● ●●●●●● ● ● ● ●● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●● ●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ●● ●●●● ●●● ●● ● ●● ● ●●●● ● ● ●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●● ●● ●● ● ●●● ●●●●●●●● ●●●●●● ●●●●●●● ●● ●● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ●●●● ●●● ●● ● ●● ●●● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●● ●●● ● ● ● ●● ●● ● ●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ●● ●● ● ● ● ●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●● ●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ●●● ●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●● ● ●●●●●● ●●●● ●● ● ● ● ●●●●● ●●●●● ● ● ● ● ●● ●●● ● ●●●●●● ● ● ●● ● ● ●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●● ●●●● ● ● ● ●●● ● ● ● ●● ●● ●●●●● ●●●●● ●● ● ● ● ●● ●●●●●● ● ● ●●●●●●● ● ● ● ●●● ● ●● ● ●●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ●●●●● ● ●●●●● ● ● ●●● ●●●●● ●●●● ● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●● ● ●●●● ●● ●● ● ● ●● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ●● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●● ●● ● ●●●● ●●●●●● ●●●●● ●●●●●●● ●● ● ● ●●●●●● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ●● ● ●●●●●●●●● ●● ●●● ●●● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ●●●●●●● ● ● ● ● ●●● ● ●●●●● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ●●● ● ●●●●●●●● ● ● ●●●● ●● ●●● ● ● ●●●●●●●● ●● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ●●●●●● ●● ●●●● ● ● ● ●● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ●●● ●●●● ●●●● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ●●● ● ●●● ●● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●● ● ●●●● ● ● ●●● ●●●●● ● ● ●●● ● ● ●●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●● ● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●● ●● ●●● ● ● ●●● ● ●●●● ●● ● ● ● ●●●● ● ●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●● ● ● ●● ● ●●● ● ●● ●●●● ● ● ● ●●● ● ● ●●●● ● ●●●● ●●●● ●● ● ● ● ●● ●●●●● ●● ●● ●●●● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ●●●●● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●● ● ● ●●●●●●● ● ●●● ● ●●● ● ● ● ●●● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●● ●●●●● ● ●●●●●● ● ●● ● ●● ●●●●● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ●●●●●●● ●● ●● ● ●●● ● ●● ● ● ●● ●● ●●●●●●● ● ●● ●●● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●● ●●● ●●●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ●●● ●●● ●●● ●● ● ● ● ● ●●●● ● ● ●●●●●● ●●●●●●●● ● ● ●●● ● ●● ● ●● ● ● ●● ●●● ●●●●●●●● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●● ● ● ● ●●●● ● ●●● ● ●●● ● ● ● ●●●●●● ●● ●● ●●●●● ●●● ● ●● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ●●●● ●●●●●●● ● ● ●● ●● ● ●● ●● ● ● ● ●●●●● ● ● ●●●●●●●● ●● ●●● ● ●●●●●● ● ● ● ●● ●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●● ●●●● ●●●●● ● ● ● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ●●●●●● ●●● ●●●●● ●●●●●● ●● ● ● ●● ●● ● ● 0.6 ● ● ● ● ●●● ●● ● ● ●●●●●●● ●● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●● ● ●●●●●● ●●●● ● ● ●● ● ●●● ●● ●● ● ● ●● ● ●●●●● ●●●●●●● ●●●● ● ● ● ●● ●●● ● ●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●● ● ●●●●●●●●●● ●● ● ●● ● ● ●●● ● ● ●● ● ●● ● ●● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●● ● ●● ● ●● ● ● ●●●●● ● ● ●●● ●●●●● ● ●● ●●●●●●●●● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ●● ● ● ●●●● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ●● ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●● ●●●●●● ● ● ●●●● 0.3 ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ●●●● ● ● ●●●●● ●● ● ● ● ● 0.3 ●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ●● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ●● ● ● ●●● ●● ● ● ● ●● ● ●● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●● ●●● ● ●●● ● ●●● ●● ● ● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●●●●● ● ●● ● ●●● ●● ● ●●● ● ●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●● ●●●● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ●● ● ●●● ● ● ● ●●● ●● ●●● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ●●●●●● ● ● ●●●●●●●● ●● ●● ●●●● ●● ● ● ●● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● ●●●● ● ●●●● ●●● ● ●●● ●●●●●● ● ●●●●●●●● ●● ●●●●●● ●●● ● ●● ●●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ●● ●●● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ●●●●● ● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●● ● ●●●●● ● ●●● ● ●●●● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ●●● ●● ● ● ●●●●●● ●● ●● ● ● ●●● ●●●●● ● ●●●●●●●●● ●●●● ●●●●●● ● ●●●● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ●●● ●● ● ●●● ●● ●●●●●●●● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ●● ●● ● ●● ●●●●● ●● ●● ● ●● ●●● ● ● ● ●● ●●●●●●●●●● ●● ●● ● ●● ● ● ●●● ●●● ● ●● ● ●● ●●●●●● ● ●● ● ● ●●●●● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●● ● ●●●●● ●● ● ● ● ●●● ●●● ●●● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●● ●●● ●● ● ●●●●● ● ● ● ●●●● ● ● ●●●● ● ● ● ● ●● ●●● ●●●●●●● ● ● ●● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●● ● ● ●●● ●●● ● ●● ● ●●● ● ● ●●●● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ●● ● ●● ● ●● ●● ●●● ●● ● ●● ●● ● ● ● ● ●● ●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ●● ● ●● ●● ● ●● ● ●●●● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ●●●●● ● ●● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ● ●●●● ●● ● ●●● ●● ●● ●●●●●● ●● ● ●●●● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ●● ● ●●● ● ●● ●●● ●●● ● ● ●●●●●●●●● ●●●● ● ● ●●● ●● ● ● ●●●●●●● ●●●●● ●●●● ● ●● ●●● ● ●●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ◆ ● ● ● ●●●●● ●● ●●● ● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ●●●● ● ●●●●●●● ●●●● ●● ● ● ● ● ●●●● ● ●● ●●● ●● ●● ●●●● ● ●●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ●●●●● ●●● ● ● ●● ●●● ●●●● ●●●● ● ●●●●●● ● ●●●●● ● ● ●● ●●●●●● ● ● ● ●●● ● ●● ● ●●● ● ●●●●●●●● ● ● ● ●● ● ●●●●●● ●● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●● ● ●● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ●● ●●●● ●● ●●● ●●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ●●● ●● ●● ● ●● ●●● ● ●●●●● ● ● ●● ● ● ●●●●● ● ●●● ● ● ●●●●●● ● ● ● ●●● ●● ● ●● ●●●●● ●● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ●● ●●● ● ●● ●●●● ● ● ●● ● ●●●●● ● ●● ● ● ● ●● ● ●●● ● ●● ●● ●●●● ●●●● ● ● ●●●● ●●●● ● ●●●● ● ● ●●● ●●● ● ● ●●●●●● ●● ● ● ●●●● ● ● ●●●●●●● ●● ● ● ●●● ● ●● ●●● ● ●● ● ●●● ●●●● ●● ● ●●● ●●●●● ●●● ● ●●● ●●●●● ● ●●●● ● ● ● ●● ●●●●● ●●● ●● ●● ●●● ● ●● ● ● ●● ●●● ● ●● ● ●●● ●●●● ● ●●● ●● ●●● ● ●●● ● ●● ●●●●● ● ●● ● ● ●●●●● ●●●●● ● ●●●● ● ● ●● ●● ● ● ● ●●● ●●●● ●●● ● ●● ● ●● ● ●●● ●●● ●●● ●● ●● ●●● ●● ●● ● ●●● ●●●●● ●●● ● ●●● 0.2 ●●●●●● ●●●● ●● ●●●●● 0.2 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●● ●● ●●●● ●●● ● ● ●●● ● ●● ●●●●● ● ●● ●● ●●●●● ●●●●●●● ●●●●●● ● ●●●●● ● ●●● ●●●●●● ● ●●● ●● ● ●●●● ● ●● ● ●●●●●●● ● ●●● ●●●● ●●●●●●●●● ● ●●●●●●●● ●● ●●● ●●●● ●●●●● ● ●●● ●●● ●●● ●● ●●●●● ● ●●●● ●● ●●● ● ●● ●●● ●● ●●●●● ● ● ● ● ●● ●●●● ●● ●●●● ● ●● ●●●● ●●● ● ● ●● ●●●● ● ● ●●●●● ●●● ●● ●● ● ● ●● ●●●● ● ●●●●● ● ● ●●●● ●● ● ●●●●● ● ● ●●●●●●● ●●●●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●●● ● ●●●● ● ● ●●● ●●●●● ●● ● ● ●● ●● ●●●●●● ● ●● ● ●●● ●●●● ● ● ●●● ●● ● ●●●●● ● ●●● ● ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●● ● ●●●● ● ● ●●● ●● ●● ●●● ● ●●●●● ●● ● ●●● ● ●●●●● ● ●●●● ●●●●● ● ● ●● ● ●●●●●● ●●● ●● ●● ●●●● ●●● ● ● ● ●● ● ●●●●●●● ● ● ●● ●●●● ● ● ● ●● ● ●●● ●● ●●●● ●●●● ●●● ●●●●●●● ●●●●● ●●●●● ● ● ● ●● ●●● ● ● ● ● ●● ●● ● ●● ●●● ◆ ● ●● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ●●●● ● ● ●●●● ●●● ●●●● ●●●●●●●●●● 0.4 ● ●●●● ●●●● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ●●●●● 0.1 ●●●●●● ● ● ● 0.1 ●● ●●● ●●●● ●●●● ●●●●● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●   Rez Rez 0.0 0.0 ◆ 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 - - - - ◆ 0.2 ◆ FIG. 4. The distribution ofz ˆ. (Left) with tempering. ◆ ◆ ◆ (Right) without tempering. 0.0 ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ 0 5 10 15 βμ tions are widely distributed over many thimbles when the tempering is implemented, they are restricted to only a FIG. 6. The nearest-neighbor charge-charge correlations small number of thimbles when not implemented. nxny S (Nτ = 5) h i Three comments are in order. First, a larger value of the sign average does not necessarily mean a better Such discrepancies become more manifest if we look resolution of the sign problem, as can be seen from Fig. 5. at the observables that are not directly constructed In fact, when only a very few thimbles are sampled, the from the number density operator nx. As an exam- sign average can become larger than the value in the ple, we show in Fig. 7 the expectation values of the ki- correct sampling due to the absence of phase mixtures netic energy operator (without the factor “ κ”) K among diﬀerent thimbles. − ≡ x,y σ Kxy cx† ,σcy,σ, which are estimated for the same sampleP P as above by using the formula (B14). We there |〈 θ 〉| ,-( 〈K〉 ◆ / !" #$%& ('>() ◆ (-1 /) !" #$%& ('>() 4 ◆ # $&*$%& ('=() ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆

(-0 ◆ ◆ 3 ◆ (-/ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ 2 (-. ◆ ◆ ◆ w/ tempering (T>0) ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ w/o tempering (T>0) ◆ ◆ (-( 1 reweighting (T=0) ( + ,( ,+ βμ exact values ◆ exact values (Nτ=∞) ◆ ◆ iθT (x) FIG. 5. The sign averages at T , e Seff 0 |h i T | 0 5 10 15 βμ

Second, whether the multimodality can aﬀect the estimates of expectation values depends on the choice of observables. In fact, from the discrepancies of the sign 3 We thank the referee for suggesting us to investigate the ex- averages in Fig. 5, we see that the multimodality must pectation values of observables other than the number density be severe in the region βµ 9. However, the estimates operator. ≤ 6

FIG. 7. The kinetic energies K S (Nτ = 5) More generally, we should keep developing the algo- h i rithm further so that it can be more easily applied to notice two things. One is that the discrepancies between the three major problems listed in Introduction. There the two methods now become significant for all the range should also be other interesting branches of fields where 7 βµ 9. The other is that the precision of the the TLTM may shed new light on the theoretical un- TLTM≤ becomes≤ worse compared to the case for the ob- derstanding through a numerical analysis, such as the servables that are constructed solely from nx. In fact, Chern-Simons theory [34] and matrix models that gener- those observables that are not directly constructed from ate random volumes [35]. a/b 1 nx (such as K) contain matrix elements of M [φ]− , When we were preparing the first version of the and may have divergently large values in the vicinity of manuscript, there appeared an interesting paper [23] (see zeros of the fermion determinants det M a/b[φ]. In this also its detailed version [24]), where the sign and ergod- case, precise estimation will require a larger sample size icity problems are also studied for the Lefschetz thimble and a more accuracy in integrating flow equations com- method applied to the Hubbard model away from half- pared with operators constructed solely from nx. We filling. In our method (TLTM), the two problems are expect that a similar attention must be paid when one solved simultaneously by tempering the system with the applies the TLTM to finite density QCD. We leave a fur- flow time, where one does not need to know a detailed ther investigation of this point as a future investigation. structure of thimbles. In contrast, in [23, 24] they re- Finally, from Fig. 8, we see that it should be a dif- dundantly introduce two continuous Gaussian Hubbard- ficult task to find an intermediate flow time (without Stratonovich variables with a parameter representing the tempering) that avoids both the sign problem (severe at mixture of the two variables (see also [22]). With knowl- smaller flow times) and the multimodal problem (severe edge of thimble structures, they tune the parameter in at larger flow times) (see Appendix E for more detailed such a way that only a few number of thimbles become relevant to the evaluation, and obtain results for a 2 2 discussions). Generically, flowed configurations repeat- × hexagonal lattice (Ns = 8) with Nτ = 384 and β = 30. It

i θ would be interesting to introduce such redundant integra- |e ta | n 0.4 a tion variables also in the TLTM so as to reduce the global 0.4 ● w/o tempering ● ● sign problem (possible cancellation of phases among dif- ● ● ● 0.3 ● ● 0.3 3/ 2 Nconf ● ● ● ferent thimbles), which we observe also depends heavily ● 0.2 0.2 ● ● on the choice of integration variables. ● ● 0.1 0.1 w/o tempering ● ● ● ● ● exact value 0.0 ● a 0.0 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2● 4 6 8 10 a ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

FIG. 8. Without tempering (βµ = 5). (Left) the sign The authors thank Yoshimasa Hidaka, Issaku averages. (Right) the estimatesn ¯a. There is no such flow time Kanamori, Norio Kawakami, Yoshio Kikukawa, Jun that clearly avoids both the sign and multimodal problems Nishimura, Akira Ohnishi, Masaki Tezuka, Asato simultaneously (at least for the present spacings). Tsuchiya and Urs Wenger for useful discussions. They also thank an anonymous referee of Physical Review D edly experience the event at which they get trapped to for giving us valuable comments, which were very help- fewer number of Lefschetz thimbles, so that there is a ful in improving the first version of the manuscript. This large ambiguity in distinguishing the larger and smaller work was partially supported by JSPS KAKENHI (Grant flow times in the first place. Numbers 16K05321, 18J22698 and 17J08709) and by SPIRITS 2019 of Kyoto University (PI: M.F.).

IV. CONCLUSION AND OUTLOOK Appendix A: Summary of the algorithm In this paper, we proposed an algorithm for the TLTM which allows a precise estimation of expectation values. We summarize the algorithm of the TLTM (we par- We confirm the effectiveness by applying it to the two- tially repeat the presentation of [14]): dimensional Hubbard model away from half-filling. Step 0. We fix the maximum flow time T which should • We should stress that our study in this paper is still be sufficiently large such that the sign problem is re- at an exploratory level. In fact, the lattice must be en- duced there. A possible criterion is that the sign average iθT (x) larged much more both in the spatial and imaginary time e Seff is O(1) in the absence of tempering. This |h i T | directions to claim the validity of our method for the can be carried out by a test run with small statistics. We sign problem in the Hubbard model, revealing the phase then pick up flow times t from the interval [0,T ] with { a} structure of the model. In doing this, it should be im- t0 = 0 < t1 < < tA = T . The values of A and ta portant to check whether the computational scaling is are determined··· manually or adaptively to optimize the 3 4 actually O(N − ) as expected. acceptance rate in Step 3 below. Practically, once A is 7 determined, ta can be chosen to be a piecewise linear In the above algorithm, we have implicitly assumed function of a [see the argument for (D1)]. that the action at t0 = 0 does not exhibit multimodal- Step 1. For each replica a, we choose an initial value ity. If this is not the case, we further introduce other • N xa R and numerically solve the differential equations parameters (such as the overall coefficient of the action) ∈ as extra tempering parameters or prepare flow times t (2) and (7) to obtain the triplet (xa,za zta (xa),Ja a ≡ ≡ with t < 0 [14]. { } Jta (xa)). 0 Step 2. For each replica a, we use the Metropolis algo- • rithm to update the value of xa. To be explicit, we take Appendix B: Derivation of eqs. (11)–(14) a value xa′ from xa using a symmetric proposal distribution, and recalculate the triplet (xa′ ,za′ ,Ja′ ) using the xa′ as the initial value. We then update xa to xa′ with the For a bipartite lattice, we specify which sublattice x ∆Sa x probability min(1,e− ), where belongs to by the sign ( 1) = 1. We first make − ± eff eff the so-called particle-hole transformation, cx, = ax and ↑ ∆Sa Sta (xa′ ) Sta (xa) x ≡ − cx, = ( 1) bx† . Then the one-body part H1 and the ↓ − = (Re S(z′ ) ln detJ ′ ) (Re S(z ) ln detJ ). two-body part H of the Hamiltonian (10) are rewritten, a − a − a − a 2 (A1) respectively, as

We repeat the process sufficiently many times such that H = (κK + µ11)xy a† ay (κK µ11)xy b† by, local equilibrium is realized for each a. Step 1 and Step 1 − x − − x Xx,y Xx,y 2 can be performed in parallel processes. (B1) Step 3. We swap the configurations at two adjacent • a b replicas a and a + 1 by updating (xa, xa+1) = (x, y) to H = U (n 1/2)(n 1/2) 2 − x − x − (xa′ , xa′ +1) = (y, x) with the probability Xx a b 2 Seff (y) Seff (x)+Seff (x)+Seff (y) = (U/2) (nx nx) NsU/4. (B2) − ta − ta+1 ta ta+1 − − wa(x, y) = min 1, e . Xx (A2) a In the last equation, we have used the identity nx ( a 2 b b 2 ≡ One can easily see that this satisfies the detailed balance ax† ax) = (nx) and nx ( bx† bx) = (nx) . Note that the condition with respect to the global equilibrium distribu- number density operator≡ is written as tion (8) because a b Seff (x) Seff (y) Seff (y) Seff (x) n (1/Ns) (nx, + nx, 1) = (1/Ns) (nx nx). ta ta+1 ta ta+1 ≡ ↑ ↓ − − wa(x, y) e− − = wa(y, x) e− − . Xx Xx (A3) (B3) We repeat the process several times so as to reduce au- In order to perform a Monte Carlo simulation, we tocorrelations. This procedure can also be performed in approximate e βH in the grand partition function by parallel processes by choosing a set of independent pairs. − using the Trotter decomposition with equal spacing ǫ Step 4. By repeating Step 2 and Step 3, we obtain a (β = N ǫ): sequence• of triplets, τ

βH ǫ(H +H ) Nτ ǫH ǫH Nτ (x(k),z(k),J (k)) , (A4) e− = (e− 1 2 ) (e− 1 e− 2 ) , (B4) { a a a }k=1,2,...,Nconf ≃ for each a, with which we estimate the expectation value ǫH2 and rewrite e− at the ℓ-th position from the right to at ﬂow time ta: the exponential of a fermion bilinear by using a Gaussian iθt (x) (k) Hubbard-Stratonovich variable φ : e a (z (x)) Nconf iθ (k) ℓ,x ta Seff e a za O ta ≈ k=1 ¯ O(k) a a b 2 iθta (x) Nconf iθ ǫH N ǫU/4 (ǫU/2) P (n n ) e eff P e a ≡ O 2 s x x x Sta k=1 e− = e e− −

(kP) (k) dφ 2 a b [θ θ (x )]. (A5) NsǫU/4 ℓ,x (1/2) φ + i√ǫU φℓ,x(n n ) a ta a = e e− ℓ,x x− x . ≡ Z √2π Here, N is chosen to be large enough so that we find Yx conf (B5) some range of a (to be denoted by a = amin,...,amax iθt with amax = A) in which the 1σ intervals around e a = Then, the approximated grand partition function takes (k) (1/N ) eiθta (xa ) are above 3/√2N and ¯ the following path integral form: conf k conf Oa take the sameP value within the statistical error margin. ǫH1 ǫH2 Nτ Step 5. The expectation value of is estimated ZQMC tr (e− e− ) • hOiS ≡ 2 ¯ by the χ fit from the data a a=amin,...,amax with a ǫU/4 Nτ Ns S[φ] {O } = (e /√2π) [dφ] e− . (B6) constant function of a. Global equilibrium and the suffi- Z ciency of the sample size Nconf is checked by looking at 2 2 the optimized value of χ /DOF = χ /(a a ). Here, [dφ] dφ x, and the action S[φ] is given by max − min ≡ ℓ,x ℓ, Q 8

2 † † S[φ] P (1/2) φℓ, ǫ P (κK+µ 11)xy a ay P (i√ǫU φℓ,x) a ax e− = e− ℓ,x x tra e x,y x e x x Yℓ † † ǫ P (κK µ 11)xy b by P ( i√ǫU φℓ,x) b bx tr e x,y − x e x − x , (B7) × b Yℓ

where is an ordered product ( fℓ fNτ 1 f1f0), The expectation values of such observables that are ℓ ℓ ≡ − ··· and traQ(or trb) represents the traceQ over the Fock space made solely from the number density operators nx a b ≡ created by ax† (or by bx† ). The fermion trace in (B7) nx, + nx, 1= nx nx can be evaluated as a path in- ↑ ↓ − − 1 can be evaluated explicitly by using the following for- tegral over φ by simply replacing nx by (i√ǫU)− φℓ=0,x, ˆ mulas that hold for the operator A Axy ax† ay as easily proved by using the operator identity ≡ x,y constructed from an Ns Ns matrix A =P (Axy): × 2 a b (1/2) φ + i√ǫU φ (nx nx) a b ˆ ˆ ˆ dφ e− − (nx nx) eA eB = eC eA eB = eC, (B8) Z − ⇒ a b Aˆ A (1/2) φ2+ i√ǫU φ (n n ) tr e = det (111+ e ). (B9) = dφ e− x− x φ/(i√ǫU). (B12) Z (The first equation can be readily proved by the fact that For example, the expectation value of the number density A Aˆ is a Lie algebra homomorphism. The second 7→ operator, n S , can be rewritten to a path integral form equation can be easily understood by moving to a di- as in (11).h i agonalizing basis for A.) We thus find that the action As for observables of general form, one can resort to becomes the Wick-Bloch-de Dominicis theorem, 2 S[φ] (1/2) Pℓ,x φℓ,x a b e− = e− det M [φ] det M [φ], (B10) Aˆ tr e axm ax1 a† ′ a† ′ x1 x ′ a/b 1 βµ ǫκK i√ǫUφℓ ··· ··· m M [φ]=11+ e± e e± , (B11) A 1 A 1 (1 + e )x− x′ (1 + e )x− x′ Yℓ 1 1 ··· 1 m A . . . = δmm′ det(1 + e ) . .. . , where φℓ is a diagonal matrix of the form φℓ = (φℓ,x δxy). A 1 A 1 (1 + e )− ′ (1 + e )− ′ Note that, while the action is real-valued for the half- xmx1 xmxm b ··· filling case (µ = 0) due to the identity M [φ] µ=0 = (B13) a | (M [φ] µ=0)∗, it is generically complex-valued when µ = 0. | 6 to obtain the following expression:

ǫH1 ǫH2 Nτ † ′ † ′ † ′ † ′ tr (e− e− ) axm ax1 ax ax byn by1 by by ··· 1 ··· m′ ··· 1 ··· n′ ǫH ǫH Nτ tr (e− 1 e− 2 ) a a b b ∆x x′ ∆x x′ ∆y y′ ∆y y′ 1 1 ··· 1 m 1 1 ··· 1 n δmm′ δnn′ S[φ] ...... S[φ] = [dφ] e− ...... Z = [dφ] e− , (B14) Z . . . · . . . Z a a b b Z ′ ′ ∆x x ∆xmx ∆y y′ ∆y y′ m 1 ··· m n 1 ··· n n

a/b a/b 1 where ∆ [φ]= M [φ]− . the explicit forms of the matrix elements that appear in the trace under the Trotter decomposition:

Appendix C: Evaluation of the trace under the Trotter decomposition

The Hilbert space V of the Hubbard model after the particle-hole transformation is the tensor product of two ǫH1 ǫH2 Nτ Nτ V Va Vb tr (e− e− ) n tr (T1T2) n Fock spaces, = , each constructed by acting ax† n S = = . (C1) ǫH ǫH Nτ Nτ ⊗ h i tr (e− 1 e− 2 ) tr (T1T2) or bx† on the Fock vacuum 0 . In this appendix, we give | i 9

Here, the one-body part H1 and the two-body part H2 where the coefficients do not vanish only when X = b ǫHb | | of the Hamiltonian are given by [see (B1) and (B2)] X′ (= m). The matrix elements of T = e− 1 can also | | 1 a b be given in the forms of determinant, H1 = H1 11+11 H1, (C2) ⊗ ⊗ b a a (T1 )YY ′ H1 = hxy ax† ay (κK + µ11)xy ax† ay, (C3) ≡ − ǫκK ǫκK Xx,y Xx,y (e )y y′ (e )y y′ 1 1 ··· 1 n ǫµ Y . . b b . .. . ′ H1 = hxy bx† by (κK µ11)xy bx† by, (C4) = e− | | . . . δ Y , Y ≡ − − | | | | x,y x,y ǫκK ǫκK X X (e )y y′ (e )y y′ n 1 ··· n n a b H2 = U (nx 1/2) (nx 1/2). (C5) (n Y = Y ′ ). (C13) − − ⊗ − Xx ≡ | | | | We thus obtain the explicit forms of the matrix elements The number density operator is given by a b (T1)XY,X′Y ′ = (T1 )XX′ (T1 )YY ′ . ǫH2 1 As for T2 = e− , we note that H2 acts on X Y n = (na 1 1 nb ), (C6) diagonally: | i ⊗ | i N x ⊗ − ⊗ x s Xx H2 X Y and we have introduced the transfer matrices correspond- | i ⊗ | i 1 1 ing to H1 and H2: = U a† az X b†bz Y − z − 2 | i⊗ z − 2 | i Xz a b ǫH1 ǫH ǫH a b T1 e− = e− 1 e− 1 T T , (h ) X Y . (C14) ≡ ⊗ ≡ 1 ⊗ 1 ≡ 2 XY | i ⊗ | i ǫH2 T2 e− . (C7) ≡ The coefficients (h2)XY can be calculated easily to be We first introduce a one-dimensional ordering to the (h ) set of all spatial coordinates, Λ = x , and take a basis 2 XY V { } U of to be = θ(z X) θ(z Y ) θ(z X) θ(z / Y ) − 4 ∈ ∈ − ∈ ∈ Xz X Y , (C8) {| i ⊗ | i} θ(z / X) θ(z Y )+ θ(z / X) θ(z / Y ) − ∈ ∈ ∈ ∈ where the states U = (2 X Y +2 X¯ Y¯ N ), (C15) − 4 | ∩ | | ∩ |− s Va X ax† ax† ax† 0 , (C9) | i≡ 1 2 ··· m | i ∈ ¯ Vb where θ() is the logical step function and X stands Y by† by† by† 0 , (C10) | i≡ 1 2 ··· n | i ∈ for the complement of the set X, X¯ = Λ X. The \ are labeled by the subsets of ordered coordinates, X = matrix elements of T2 is then given by (T2)XY,X′Y ′ = ǫ(h )XY e− 2 δ ′ δ ′ . x1, x2,..., xm Λ (with x1 < x2 < < xm), Y = XX YY { } ⊂ ··· Finally, the matrix elements of n are given by y1, y2,..., yn Λ (with y1 < y2 < < yn). We will {denote their sizes}⊂ by X = m, Y = n···. a 1 | | a | | ǫH1 The matrix elements of T1 = e− are then given by nXY,X′Y ′ = ( X Y ) δXX′ δYY ′ . (C16) the following determinants: Ns | | − | |

ǫha ǫha With the matrix elements given above, n S can be ex- (e− )x x′ (e− )x x′ h i 1 1 ··· 1 m pressed as a . . . (T1 )XX′ = . .. . δ X , X′ | | | | Nτ ǫha ǫha (T1 T2) ( X Y ) (e− )x x′ (e− )x x′ 1 X,Y Λ XY,XY m 1 m m n = ⊂ | | − | | . ··· S N ǫκK ǫκK h i Ns P (T T ) τ ′ ′ X,Y Λ 1 2 XY,XY ( e )x1x (e )x1x 1 ··· m ⊂ ǫµ X . . . P (C17) = e | | . .. . δ X , X′ . . | | | | ǫκK ǫκK (e )x x′ (e )x x′ m 1 ··· m m Appendix D: Summary of the parameters in the (m X = X′ ), (C11) ≡ | | | | computation a as can be easily proven by investigating the action of T1 on the state X′ : We summarize the parameters relevant to the TLTM in | i the estimation of n S. We order the termination times a † h i a ǫ Pxy hxyaxay t for replicas a as t = 0 < t < < t = T (T : T1 X′ = e− ax† ′ ax† ′ 0 a 0 1 A | i 1 ··· m | i ··· the largest flow time), and set ta to be a piecewise linear a X (T )XX′ , (C12) function of a with a single breakpoint at a = a , by ≡ | i 1 c XX assuming that the deformed region reaches the vicinity 10 of all the relevant Lefschetz thimbles at almost the same TABLE I. TLTM parameters and the results flow time and that the linear form is effective also for the transient period:

tc a/ac (0 a ac) ta = ≤ ≤ . tc + (T tc) (a ac)/(A ac) (ac

θta (x) for βµ = 5 with tempering (top) and without tem- βµ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 pering (bottom). We see that at smaller flow times the T/(βµ) 1/12 1/12 1/12 1/11 1/11 1/11 1/11 1/11 histograms are almost flat for the both cases (giving rise A 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 to the sign problem), but at larger flow times those with- tc/T 0.5 0.55 0.55 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 out tempering become almost unimodal (reflecting the ac 5 5 6 6 6 7 7 7 trapping at a small number of thimbles) while those with Nswap 12 12 14 14 14 14 14 14 tempering correctly come to have various peaks (which Nconf 10k 10k 10k 10k 5k 5k 5k 5k may not be so obvious from the figure because there are amin 8 8 10 8 9 10 9 9 many peaks and each peak is broadened by the Jacobian 2 χ /DOF 0.09 0.92 0.21 1.74 0.40 0.17 0.75 0.20 determinant).

[1] G. Aarts, “Introductory lectures on lattice QCD at [2] J. E. Hirsch, “Two-dimensional Hubbard model: Numer- nonzero baryon number,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 706, no. ical simulation study,” Phys. Rev. B 31, 4403 (1985). 2, 022004 (2016) [arXiv:1512.05145 [hep-lat]]. [3] E. Y. Loh, J. E. Gubernatis, R. T. Scalettar, S. R. White, 11

Simulation of Spin-Glasses,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 57 2607 “The ALF (Algorithms for Lattice Fermions) project re- (1986). lease 1.0. Documentation for the auxiliary ﬁeld quantum [26] C. J. Geyer, “Markov Chain Monte Carlo Maximum Monte Carlo code,” SciPost Phys. 3 (2017) no.2, 013 Likelihood,” in Computing Science and Statistics: Pro- [arXiv:1704.00131 [cond-mat.str-el]]. ceedings of the 23rd Symposium on the Interface, Amer- [32] Y, Motome and M. Imada, “A Quantum Monte Carlo ican Statistical Association, New York, p. 156 (1991). Method and Its Applications to Multi-Orbital Hubbard [27] D. J. Earl and M. W. Deem, “Parallel tempering: Theory, Models,” J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 66, no. 7, 1872 (1997) applications, and new perspectives,” Phys. Chem. Chem. [arXiv:cond-mat/9705069 [cond-mat.str-el]]. Phys. 7, 3910 (2005). [33] F. F. Assaad, M. Imada and D. J. Scalapino, “Charge and [28] M. Fukuma, N. Matsumoto and N. Umeda, “Distance be- spin structures of a dx2−y2 superconductor in the proxim- tween conﬁgurations in Markov chain Monte Carlo simu- ity of an antiferromagnetic Mott insulator,” Phys. Rev. lations,” JHEP 1712, 001 (2017) [arXiv:1705.06097 [hep- B 56, 15001 (1997). [arXiv:cond-mat/9706173 [cond- lat]]. mat.str-el]]. [29] M. Fukuma, N. Matsumoto and N. Umeda, “Emergence [34] E. Witten, “Analytic Continuation Of Chern-Simons of AdS geometry in the simulated tempering algorithm,” Theory,” AMS/IP Stud. Adv. Math. 50, 347 (2011) JHEP 1811, 060 (2018) [arXiv:1806.10915 [hep-th]]. [arXiv:1001.2933 [hep-th]]. [30] R. Blankenbecler, D. J. Scalapino and R. L. Sugar, [35] M. Fukuma, S. Sugishita and N. Umeda, “Random “Monte Carlo Calculations of Coupled Boson - Fermion volumes from matrices,” JHEP 1507, 088 (2015) Systems. 1.,” Phys. Rev. D 24, 2278 (1981). [arXiv:1503.08812 [hep-th]]. [31] M. Bercx, F. Goth, J. S. Hofmann and F. F. Assaad,