forum@abinit.org
Subject: The ABINIT Users Mailing List ( CLOSED )
List archive
- From: Matthieu Verstraete <mjv500@york.ac.uk>
- To: forum@abinit.org
- Subject: Re: [abinit-forum] Fwd: Pseudopotential observation (fwd)
- Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 15:01:36 +0100 (BST)
Hi Martin, thanks for the precious info.
On Wed, 31 May 2006, Martin Fuchs wrote:
4) the 3d wavefunction that for a Si++ with 3s1 3p0.75 3d0.25 occupation,Now this is strange. What could be is that the old pseudopotentials which existed for 4 or 5 elements were preserved and incorporated into the ones I had generated. Could it be that the the whole file (psp+pswf) was generated from this same configuration? Probably not. In any event I didn't do any of the psp and pswfk mixing in these pseudopotentials, so it really is wierd. I'm more inclined to believe your reverse engineering than my memory, though. How do you reverse engineer? Or is that just personal craft?
generated by a separate run; the occupation is like in the BHS paper;
this yields a bound eigenstate, i.e. a localized function, to be prefered
e.g. for the Kleinman-Bylander form of the pseudopotential (of course
irrelevant if d is used as local component, see below too!) or for
projected DOS purposes
6) thus this is not a problem of changing fhipp versions butor abused as the case may be.
of how fhipp has been used:)
My process was a script which explains why everyone has f channels. Not optimal, I agree, but it insured some measure of preliminary testing. If someone wants to tweak them, please feel free! It would suffice to cut out the excess psp and pswf and reduce the maximum l value in the header. For the first 2 rows at least, it would be worth it.
... and perhaps more importantly
7) the abinit files for Si and N (and presumably other main group
elements) contain f components. If I understand alright, those f's
are included in an actual abinit run!? Usually, s,p,d should be sufficient
for Si and N, and d is an appropriate local potential (this holds for
many other main group elements too, not for transition metals).
Why the extra computational effort (5 more pseudopotential projections)
for including also the f's???
Matthieu
--
================================================================
Dr. Matthieu Verstraete mailto:mjv500@york.ac.uk
Dept. of Physics, University of York, tel: +44 1904 43 22 08
Heslington, YO10 5DD York, United Kingdom fax: +44 1904 43 22 14
- Re: [abinit-forum] Fwd: Pseudopotential observation (fwd), Sebastien Hamel, 06/01/2006
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: [abinit-forum] Fwd: Pseudopotential observation (fwd), Matthieu Verstraete, 06/01/2006
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.