To predict the ground-state structures and finite-temperature properties of an alloy, the total energies of many different atomic configurations ϵ͕ i ; i =1, . . . ,N͖, with N sites i occupied by atom A ͑ i =−1͒, or B ͑ i = +1͒, must be calculated accurately and rapidly. Direct local-density approximation (LDA) calculations provide the required accuracy, but are not practical because they are limited to small cells and only a few of the 2 N possible configurations. The "mixed-basis cluster expansion" (MBCE) method allows to parametrize LDA configurational energetics E LDA ͓ i ; i =1, . . . ,N͔ by an analytic functional E MBCE ͓ i ; i =1, . . . ,N͔. We extend the method to bcc alloys, describing how to select N ordered structures (for which LDA total energies are calculated explicitly) and N F pair and multibody interactions, which are fit to the N energies to obtain a deterministic MBCE mapping of LDA. We apply the method to bcc Mo-Ta. This system reveals an unexpectedly rich ground-state line, pitting Mo-rich (100) superlattices against Ta-rich complex structures. Predicted finite-T properties such as order-disorder temperatures, solid-solution short-range order and the random alloy enthalpy of mixing are consistent with experiment. PACS number(s): 61.66.Dk, 71.15.Nc
I. INTRODUCTION
A. The cluster expansion method: Definition and scopeAlloy thermodynamics, including properties at T = 0, require the knowledge of the excess energy
͑1͒of the solid A 1−x B x relative to the total energy of its constituents A and B. For a given underlying lattice, the degrees of freedom form a configurational vector , whose components i = ±1 record whether a lattice site i is occupied by element A ͑ i =−1͒ or B ͑ i = +1͒. Since ⌬H direct ͑͒ is difficult to calculate quantum mechanically for an exhaustive set of structures , it is often described by way of a cluster expansion (CE) Hamiltonian 1-6
͑2͕͒J͖ are the interaction parameters for each pair or many-body combination of lattice sites i , j , k, etc. The cluster expansion 7-10 attempts to describe the energies of all different configurations with the accuracy of present-day densityfunctional methods. It is based on the fact that Eq.(2) allows to map an arbitrarily complex Hamiltonian with electronic degrees of freedom exactly onto a simple sum over crystallographic degrees of freedom. 8 For practical purposes, Eq.(2) is typically recast in terms of symmetry-inequivalent figures. 11 Also, without a loss of generality one may subtract 9 a configuration-dependent reference energy E ref from ⌬H. We may expand ⌬H LDA = ⌬H LDA − E ref as ⌬H CE , so thatThe interaction parameters ͕J f ͖ now signify all possible inequivalent pairs and many-body (MB) figures f. They are configuration independent, 8 with D f as each figure's symmetry degeneracy per site-any configuration dependence is contained in the lattice-averaged correlation functions ⌸ f ͑͒. Although Eqs.(2) and (3) contain, in principle, many interactions, the energetics of bonding is usually determined by relatively short length sca...