forum@abinit.org
Subject: The ABINIT Users Mailing List ( CLOSED )
List archive
- From: "Anglade Pierre-Matthieu" <anglade@gmail.com>
- To: forum@abinit.org
- Subject: Re: [abinit-forum] comment problem
- Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 11:34:50 +0200
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=CeH9jITJ/b8G25aCzsWIDmvgbMgr5Yn5ISOeW//poaV51jWmtGGrXTwRiKiszjde45Omn1eBAwMmFuSy2PFKsZ/tmN6Po3oc550POkSvmWx4WrZWQF5AAnNcEmJzIBQV06m1AdIiYMdRWSxRjcBbrz2PB9zIvad0iJIgIX4VWgo=
This only tells you that you wont get a KB energy consistent with the
usual definition. Yet, since you don't care about the Kleinman
Bylander energy for elastic constant calaculation (or even most
calculation people preforms with Abinit) you can ignore this comment.
Usually you don't have to worry about Abinit's comments. This is why
they are comments and not warnings.
On 9/26/07, m_mousavi1980@yahoo.com <m_mousavi1980@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> i run my program there are 17 comments
>
> it is(the projectors are not normalized,so that the KB energies are not
> consistent with definition in PRB44, 8503 (1991).
>
> I use Hartwigsen-Goedecker-Hutter psp for zn and o
>
> i do not understand this comment.
> can you help me about this.
>
> regard
>
--
Pierre-Matthieu Anglade
- comment problem, m_mousavi1980, 09/26/2007
- Re: [abinit-forum] comment problem, Anglade Pierre-Matthieu, 09/26/2007
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.