 from the spatially symmetric states from following consideration. The Green’s function represents the transition amplitude from an initial state to a final state and since the Hamiltonian, Eq. (3), is invariant under the exchange operation of two particles, the parity of the wavefunction is conserved during the time evolution. Since the initial state of Eq. (2) is a doubly occupied state, i.e. a spatially symmetric state, we are treating only the contributions from symmetric states.

Numerical calculations of $\xi_N$ for various values of $W, U$ and $N$ are performed for $E=0$ without approximation. $N$ is varied within the range $10 \leq N \leq 200$ and for a given parameter set, configurational average is performed over sufficiently many different realizations to control the uncertainties of $\xi_N$ within 1%.

We first examine the case of $U=0$, i.e. the noninteracting two particles. In this case, when the total energy of the system is fixed to $E$, the two-particle wavefunction is a superposition of the products of two single-particle states of energy $E'$ and $E-E'$, and the Green function is given by the convolution of two single-particle Green functions as $$\langle i,i|G(E)|j,j\rangle \sim \int dE' \langle
i|G_0(E')|j\rangle\langle i|G_0(E-E')|j\rangle.$$ It is a nontrivial problem to calculate $\xi(U=0)$ since there exist contributions from various energies. Some authors[@wei1; @opp] have assumed the relation $\xi(U=0) = \xi_1/2$, i.e. half the single-particle localization length, which should be, however, seriously examined. Our numerical data presented in Fig. 1 show that the assumption is not strictly valid. The filled symbols on the $N=\infty$ axis represent $\xi_1/2$ calculated from the expression $\xi_1 \simeq 105/W^2$[@pic] while the empty symbols are our numerical results for $\xi_N$. Taking into account the fact that the uncertainty of each data point is smaller than the symbol size, $\xi_N$ does not seem to extrapolate to $\xi_1/2$ as $N$ tends to infinity. Moreover, the discrepancy between
from the spatially symmetric states from following consideration. The Green ’s affair stage the transition amplitude from an initial state to a final country and since the Hamiltonian, Eq.   (3), is invariant under the exchange mathematical process of two particle, the parity of the wavefunction is conserved during the time evolution. Since the initial department of state of Eq.   (2) is a doubly occupied state, i.e. a spatially symmetrical state, we are treating merely the contributions from symmetric state. 

 Numerical calculations of $ \xi_N$ for various value of $ W, U$ and $ N$ are performed for $ E=0 $ without approximation. $ N$ is varied within the range $ 10 \leq N \leq 200 $ and for a pass parameter set, configurational average is performed over sufficiently many different realizations to see the uncertainties of $ \xi_N$ within 1% . 

 We first examine the case of $ U=0 $, i.e. the noninteracting two particles. In this case, when the total energy of the system is fixed to $ E$, the two - particle wavefunction is a superposition of the products of two single - particle states of energy $ E'$ and $ vitamin e - E'$, and the Green function is given by the gyrus of two individual - particle Green functions as $ $ \langle i, i|G(E)|j, j\rangle \sim \int dE' \langle 
 i|G_0(E')|j\rangle\langle i|G_0(E - E')|j\rangle.$$ It is a nontrivial trouble to calculate $ \xi(U=0)$ since there exist contribution from various energies. Some authors[@wei1; @opp ] have simulate the relation $ \xi(U=0) = \xi_1/2 $, i.e. half the single - particle localization length, which should be, however, seriously examined. Our numerical data presented in Fig.   1 show that the premise is not strictly valid. The occupy symbol on the $ N=\infty$ axis represent $ \xi_1/2 $ calculated from the formula $ \xi_1 \simeq 105 / W^2$[@pic ] while the empty symbols are our numerical results for $ \xi_N$. assume into account the fact that the uncertainty of each data compass point is smaller than the symbol size, $ \xi_N$ does not appear to extrapolate to $ \xi_1/2 $ as $ N$ tends to infinity. furthermore, the discrepancy between
 frlm the spatially symmetrlc states from followinj consiseration. The Green’s function represeits rhe teansition amplitude frum an ininial statw to q final stefe and since fme Hakmltonian, Eq. (3), is lnvariant utder the exchatgd lperation of two particles, the pariey of tne wavefunction ys cpgserbvd during the time evolution. Sihce the initial statr of Eq. (2) is a doubly occupifd shate, i.e. a spatiallj symmetric staew, we are trexting only the contribotions from symmetric states.

Numefical calculatiinw ov $\xi_N$ for vacious nalues of $W, U$ and $N$ ase perfprmed for $E=0$ wibhout approximation. $N$ is varixd within the range $10 \leq N \lex 200$ and for a given paeametgr sed, covdigjrauioial averahe ms performes over suffuciently many diffetegn realizationa to cjnerol the uncertainties of $\xi_N$ within 1%.

We fidst examine the case of $U=0$, i.e. the noninteractlng two pwrticles. In this case, when the total energy of tha sysveo iw nixea tl $E$, the two-particle wavefunction is a superpofjtook of the productf of two simgpe-lwrticle stater of eusrfy $E'$ and $E-E'$, and thf Green funcrion is gyven by the convolution of two wingle-particjw Green functions cs $$\langle i,i|Y(E)|j,j\ramgle \xim \int dE' \langle
i|G_0(E')|j\raugle\lahgle i|G_0(E-E')|j\rwngle.$$ It jr a nontrivial pfobkek to calculate $\xi(U=0)$ since trere exisv concributiovs ftom varyous energles. Some authors[@wei1; @opp] jave cssumad the relwtion $\xi(U=0) = \xi_1/2$, i.e. half the singlx-'article locakisatpon lengtk, whicm should be, howqver, seriously examinzd. Our numerical data pcesented in Sig. 1 show that jhe assumptioi is not ftrixtly valid. Gfe filled symbpls on thv $U=\infty$ axus represent $\xi_1/2$ cakcuuzted from the erkrewsion $\xi_1 \simeq 105/E^2$[@piz] wripe tra empty symbmls xre pur njmerical rewjlts for $\xi_N$. Taking into acckunt the fact that tme uncertqinty of each data poont is smaller thaj the syobol xizg, $\xi_N$ does not seem to extrapolzte to $\xi_1/2$ as $N$ tends to ynfikity. Moreover, che discrepancy between
from the spatially symmetric states from following Green’s represents the amplitude from an state since the Hamiltonian, (3), is invariant the exchange operation of two particles, parity of the wavefunction is conserved during the time evolution. Since the initial of Eq. (2) is a doubly occupied state, i.e. a spatially symmetric state, are only contributions symmetric states. Numerical calculations of $\xi_N$ for various values of $W, U$ and $N$ are performed $E=0$ without approximation. $N$ is varied within the $10 \leq N \leq and for a given parameter configurational is performed sufficiently different to control the of $\xi_N$ within 1%. We first examine the case of $U=0$, i.e. the noninteracting two particles. In case, when energy of system fixed $E$, the two-particle a superposition of the products of of energy $E'$ and $E-E'$, and the Green is given the convolution of two single-particle Green as $$\langle i,i|G(E)|j,j\rangle \sim \int dE' \langle i|G_0(E')|j\rangle\langle It is a nontrivial problem to calculate $\xi(U=0)$ since there exist contributions from various energies. @opp] have assumed the $\xi(U=0) = \xi_1/2$, half single-particle length, should be, seriously examined. Our numerical data presented in Fig. 1 show that assumption is not strictly valid. The filled symbols on the represent calculated from the $\xi_1 \simeq 105/W^2$[@pic] while empty are our numerical results Taking account the of data point is smaller the symbol size, $\xi_N$ does seem to extrapolate to infinity. Moreover, the discrepancy between
 from the spatially symmetric States from FolloWinG coNsIderAtioN. The Green’s funcTIon rEpresents the transition AmpliTuDE froM An InitiAl state TO a FINal StAtE anD sINcE the HAmiLtonian, eq. (3), is invariAnt UnDer the exchanGE oPeration of Two Particles, the ParIty of tHe WavEFunctIon Is conServed DUring tHe time evoLuTIon. SinCE the iniTIAl StatE of Eq. (2) is a doubly occUPiED state, i.e. a spatiAlly syMmETrIC StaTe, wE are treatiNg Only tHE contriBUtIONS frOM symmetric staTes.

NumericaL CalCulatiOnS of $\XI_N$ for vAriouS vALueS of $W, U$ and $N$ arE perFormed for $e=0$ withoUT approxIMation. $N$ Is variEd wIthIn thE RaNgE $10 \leQ N \LEq 200$ aND fOr a GIveN parametEr SeT, confIgurATIONal aVerAge iS perfOrmed over suffIciEntlY ManY diffErent RealIzAtionS to conTrol tHe Uncertainties of $\Xi_N$ wIthin 1%.

We fiRst ExAmiNe The caSE of $U=0$, i.e. The NonInteracTing two PArtIcLES. in This case, when the totAl ENErGy of the sYstem iS FiXeD To $E$, the twO-pArtIcle WAVefunCtioN Is A superpoSition OF tHe ProductS oF two siNgLe-pArtIcle sTAtes Of enerGy $E'$ and $E-E'$, And thE green function iS Given by the conVOlUTIoN Of twO siNgle-particlE GreEN funCtioNS aS $$\laNGle i,i|g(E)|j,j\rAnGLe \SIm \int dE' \langle
i|G_0(E')|j\raNgLe\langLe i|G_0(E-e')|j\rangle.$$ It is a Nontrivial PROBlem to caLculATe $\XI(U=0)$ since there exIst coNtributionS From variOus enErgies. SoMe authors[@WEI1; @opp] have AssUmeD thE reLATiOn $\xi(U=0) = \xi_1/2$, i.e. half THE sinGlE-particLe lOcalizaTioN leNgtH, whIcH should be, However, sErIoUsLy ExaMined. oUr numeriCaL daTa PreSenteD In Fig. 1 sHow thAt thE aSsUMptIon is noT StRICtly VaLiD. The FilLeD symbOls oN The $n=\infty$ aXis represEnt $\XI_1/2$ calCuLaTed from The expression $\Xi_1 \Simeq 105/W^2$[@pic] wHiLe tHe emptY SYmbols arE our numerical results for $\XI_N$. TakinG inTo accOunt The fact thAt tHe unceRtaINty of eAch datA poinT iS smALLer thAN ThE syMbOl size, $\xi_N$ dOES noT seem To ExtrApolate To $\xi_1/2$ as $N$ tends to infiNIty. moreover, the diScrEpanCY BeTweEN
 from the spatially symmet ric states  from  fo llo wi ng c onsi deration. TheG reen ’s function represents  thetr a nsit i on  ampl itude f r om a n i ni ti alst a te  to a  fi nal sta te and sin ceth e Hamiltonia n ,Eq. (3), i s i nvariant und erthe ex ch ang e  oper ati on of  two p a rticle s, the pa ri t y of t h e wavef u n ct ionis conserved duri n gt he time evolut ion. S in c et h e i nit ial stateof  Eq.( 2) is a do u b l y o c cupied state,  i.e. a spa t ial ly sym me tri c  state , wear e  tr eating only  the  contribu tionsf rom sym m etric s tates. 

N ume rica l  c al cul at i ons of  $\ x i_N $ for va ri ou s val ueso f $ W, U $ a nd $ N$ ar e performed f or$E=0 $  wi thout  appr oxim at ion.$N$ is  vari ed  within the ran ge $ 10 \leq N  \l eq  20 0$  andf or a g ive n p aramete r set,c onf ig u r a ti onal average is pe rf o r me d over s uffici e nt ly many dif fe ren t re a l izati onst ocontrolthe un c er ta intiesof  $\xi_ N$  wi thi n 1%. 
Wefirstexaminethe c a se of $U=0$, i . e. the nonint e ra c t in g  two  pa rticles. In  thi s  cas e, w h en  th e  tota l ene rg y  o f  the system is fixe dto $E$ , the  two-particle  wavefunct i o n  is a su perp o si t ion of the pro ducts  of two si n gle-part iclestates o f energy$ E '$ and $ E-E '$,  an d t h e  G reen function i s gi ve n by th e c onvolut ion  of  tw o s in gle-parti cle Gree nfu nc ti ons  as $ $ \langlei, i|G (E )|j ,j\ra n gle \s im \i nt d E'  \ l ang le
i|G_ 0 (E ' ) |j\r an gl e\la ngl ei|G_0 (E-E ' )|j \rangle .$$ It is  an ontr iv ia l probl em to calcula te  $\xi(U=0) $sin ce the r e  exist c ontributions from vario u s energ ies . Som e au thors[@we i1;  @opp]  ha v e assu med th e rel at ion $ \xi(U = 0 )= \ xi _1/2$, i.e . hal f the  s ingl e-parti cle localization l e ngt h, which shou ldbe,h o we ver ,  s e rio us l y e x a mined. Our nume rical data  p r es ented in F i g.1show th at theassum p tion is  not stri ctly vali d.  The f ill ed symbols  on the$N=\infty $  axis re prese nt$\xi_1 /2 $ c alcul ated f r omthe e xpress io n $\xi _1 \s im eq 105/W ^2$[@pic] while the emp ty sym bolsare  our nume ric a l r esults fo r $\ xi_N$. Tak ing  in to ac cou n t the  fac t  t hat the u ncer t ainty ofe ac h d a t apoint is sm a l l erthanthe symbol  siz e, $\xi_N$ does n o t seem to extr apol a t e t o $ \ xi_1 /2 $ as $N$ tends  to  i n f inity. M or eover, thediscrepa nc y  betw een
 from_the spatially_symmetric states from following_consideration. The_Green’s_function represents_the_transition amplitude from_an initial state_to a final state_and since the_Hamiltonian,_Eq. (3), is invariant under the exchange operation of two particles, the parity of the_wavefunction_is conserved_during_the_time evolution. Since the initial_state of Eq. (2) is a_doubly occupied_state, i.e. a spatially symmetric state, we are_treating_only the contributions_from symmetric states.

Numerical calculations of $\xi_N$ for various values_of $W, U$ and $N$ are_performed for $E=0$_without_approximation._$N$ is varied within_the range $10 \leq N \leq_200$ and for a given parameter_set, configurational average is performed over sufficiently_many different realizations to control the_uncertainties of $\xi_N$ within 1%.

We_first examine_the case of $U=0$, i.e._the noninteracting two_particles. In_this case, when_the total energy of the system_is fixed to_$E$, the two-particle wavefunction is a_superposition_of the products_of_two_single-particle states_of energy $E'$_and_$E-E'$, and_the_Green function is given by the_convolution_of two single-particle Green functions as $$\langle_i,i|G(E)|j,j\rangle \sim \int dE'_\langle
i|G_0(E')|j\rangle\langle_i|G_0(E-E')|j\rangle.$$ It is a_nontrivial problem to calculate $\xi(U=0)$_since there exist contributions from various_energies. Some_authors[@wei1; @opp]_have assumed the relation $\xi(U=0) = \xi_1/2$, i.e. half the single-particle_localization length, which should be, however,_seriously examined. Our numerical_data presented_in_Fig. 1 show that_the_assumption is_not strictly valid. The filled symbols on_the $N=\infty$_axis represent $\xi_1/2$ calculated from the_expression $\xi_1 \simeq 105/W^2$[@pic]_while_the empty symbols are our numerical_results for $\xi_N$. Taking into account_the fact that the uncertainty_of_each_data point is smaller than_the symbol size, $\xi_N$ does not_seem to extrapolate_to $\xi_1/2$ as $N$ tends to infinity._Moreover,_the discrepancy between