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] Geometrical optimization and temperature
- Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 09:53:44 +0100 (BST)
mixing relaxation and MD will not work: how do you decide which steps are relaxation and which MD? Each time you relax, you lose energy and temperature... You could do an MD at fixed Nose-Hoover or Langevin thermostat temperature, but then you have to look at all the time steps and do statistical analysis, see if your system looks like one or the other phase. Also consider applying pressure (Gilles Zerah was implementing constant P MD - what is the status on that?)
What you should be doing, in your case, is the calculation of free energies versus temperature. For each of the competing phases you do a standard GS run (eventually at different lattice parameters for the thermal expansion - this is where it gets painful), calculate the phonon spectrum, and anaddb allows you to plot the free energies vs T. The F(T) or G(T) curves should intersect and one phase becomes more stable at T_1 then another at T_2 etc... No MD needed.
One example using abinit: "Ab initio thermodynamics of MgSiO3 perovskite at high pressures and temperatures." in J. Chem. Phys. 122,pp 124501-6 (2005)
And one not using abinit: Correa et al. PNAS 103, 1204 (2006)
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
- Geometrical optimization and temperature, francois . lallet, 05/09/2007
- Re: [abinit-forum] Geometrical optimization and temperature, Matthieu Verstraete, 05/10/2007
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.