forum@abinit.org
Subject: The ABINIT Users Mailing List ( CLOSED )
List archive
- From: "Nichols A. Romero" <naromero@gmail.com>
- To: forum@abinit.org
- Subject: tolvrs vs. toldfe
- Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 10:47:00 -0500
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=gDSwxf5dT7YYukC4xVEc7LRPv0rTJVbu/HYH/X8g+WHrOqufouKhLWec/GmtTtv8q579wszoVdmPtDAL2P9jgDb8oENtA6IPn1JCNYTPeIKY8v5ByyK6ZyXQrKgbQa/U/IP1hsYGmT77MVc/Nf9r6mPU3AzUuTSRGTD9IOuTNvc=
Hi,
In the ABINIT online manual,
http://www.abinit.org/Infos_v4.5/varbas.html#tolwfr
it states in reference to using tolwfr that
"this criterion should be replaced by those based on toldfe (preferred for ionmov==0), toldff (preferred for ionmov/=0) or tolvrs (preferred for theoretical reasons!)."
I would think that in general, the best criterion for stopping the SCF is tolvrs since when self-consistency is reached it is true that
V_scf^in = V_scf^out
and
n^in = n^out
Especially in response calculation, I've noticed that using something other than tolvrs, e.g. toldfe could be potentially problematic. Isn't possible that under certain circumstances toldfe could be reached much faster than its equivalent value for tolvrs? If its possible to speak of an equivalent value for tolvrs.
--
Nichols A. Romero
4-133 ESB, MC 704 508 E. Michigan Avenue
1110 West Green Street Apartment 12
Urbana, IL 61801-3080 Urbana, IL 61801-5176
(217) 333-6108 (217) 417-5210
- tolvrs vs. toldfe, Nichols A. Romero, 07/02/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.