forum@abinit.org
Subject: The ABINIT Users Mailing List ( CLOSED )
List archive
- From: matthieu verstraete <matthieu.jean.verstraete@gmail.com>
- To: forum@abinit.org
- Subject: [abinit-forum] lda+U experience
- Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 11:11:39 +0100
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=DGkjtqtxqyfUIsqa1+x5JgUDV263DHBP8xyaSztwT8/hqGljoPCxtxEdcUFczhPFud p67z3DaFS5UPwf4LgYpcQmsVYTsA4qZ2SB4Vl8WF/zhhrxWlHZXJAIBNYiZNDIqukA1h kc9n1Qc6vgedluxhGThfeYfkKkFRldyG8MmaA=
Hello, my turn to ask a question:
I am using LDA+U with the latest (pre-release) abinit 5.7, on ifort 9.1/itanium/mpi (tests pass fine), trying to do calculations in LDA+U of alloys of d and f metals (which I cannot name for confidentiality reasons). For pure f metals I have reference values of U and J, and the f states are at the correct position, but in mixed systems the f states tend to alloy, broaden, and end up just below the Fermi level (2 eV instead of 10 eV below), and are relatively insensitive to U. This makes sense if the states are less localized, but still it's strange: experimentally the f peak in these systems is still found at -10 eV... So:
1) is this hybridization physical?
2) has anyone seen this before?
3) is there evidence that U for a surface is different from U for a bulk?
4) is there a way to increase U or something, to force the band to the "correct" position?
Cheers,
Matthieu
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dr. Matthieu Verstraete
European Theoretical Spectroscopy Facility (ETSF)
Dpto. Fisica de Materiales,
U. del Pais Vasco,
Centro Joxe Mari Korta, Av. de Tolosa, 72, Phone: +34-943018393
E-20018 Donostia-San Sebastian, Spain Fax : +34-943018390
Mail : matthieu.jean.verstraete@gmail.com
http://www-users.york.ac.uk/~mjv500
- [abinit-forum] lda+U experience, matthieu verstraete, 01/26/2009
- Re: [abinit-forum] lda+U experience, Stefaan Cottenier, 01/26/2009
- Message not available
- [abinit-forum] pseudopotential expression, Souraya Goumri-Said, 01/26/2009
- Re: [abinit-forum] pseudopotential expression, Josef Zwanziger, 01/26/2009
- Message not available
- Re: [abinit-forum] pseudopotential expression, Souraya Goumri-Said, 01/26/2009
- Re: [abinit-forum] pseudopotential expression, Josef Zwanziger, 01/26/2009
- Re: [abinit-forum] pseudopotential expression, matthieu verstraete, 01/26/2009
- Re: [abinit-forum] pseudopotential expression, Anurag Chaudhry, 01/28/2009
- Re: [abinit-forum] pseudopotential expression, Josef Zwanziger, 01/28/2009
- Re: [abinit-forum] pseudopotential expression, Josef Zwanziger, 01/26/2009
- Re: [abinit-forum] pseudopotential expression, Souraya Goumri-Said, 01/26/2009
- Message not available
- Re: [abinit-forum] pseudopotential expression, Josef Zwanziger, 01/26/2009
- [abinit-forum] pseudopotential expression, Souraya Goumri-Said, 01/26/2009
- [abinit-forum] problem in running make, vikas sharma, 01/27/2009
- Re: [abinit-forum] problem in running make, Alain Jacques, 01/27/2009
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.15.