[Pw_forum] Problem with nbnd in clusters

[Cyrille Barreteau]

Hi Nicola

Of course my (iron) cluster is magnetic and my calculation is
spin polarized.
I also did play with the various smearings (fd,mp,mv)
and the broadening but the result is quite insensitive
to this parameter.

I really have the feeling that for some reasons as Matteo
mentionned davidson with 20 bands (who knows why...)
gets trapped in some local minimum
just for numerical reasons... But this trap seems quite stable
since it remains even when changing the smearing.

It was just bad (or good) luck.

   cyrille




Nicola Marzari wrote:

>Hi Cyrille,
>
>your tm dimer will likely require spin polarization, and
>will have several scf solutions that correspond to different
>S_z (that you can fix in several ways, either specifying the
>number of spin up and spin down, or using a fermi_up and
>fermi_down energy, to specify n_up - n_down but still treating
>the system with a smearing and fractional occupations).
>
>Even for a given S_z, there will be different scf solutions
>that have different spatial symmetry.
>
>So, in your case I would definitely switch spin-polarization,
>and maybe play around with small and large smearings, to see what
>happens, and look at the states, and the occupations. Anyhow, if
>you get to a scf solution, that is a "good" solution for the GGA
>problem, although might not be very physical.
>
>Also, have a look at Kulik et al PRL 2006.
>	
>			nicola
>
>
>Cyrille Barreteau wrote:
>  
>
>>Dear pwscf_ers
>>
>>I am doing a very simple calculation on a transition metal
>>dimer and I have a encoutered a strange problem (I love
>>strange problems:-)
>>
>>I have done a first calculation with the default value
>>of nbnd, ie nbnd=nelec/2*20% (=12 in my case)
>>
>>But since it is known that in clusters it is often good
>>to increase nbnd I have performed another calculation with
>>larger nbnd (=20). The result is quite different from
>>the one at nbnd=12.
>>
>>I have then increased again nbnd up to 25 and then I recover
>>the result obtained for nbnd=12
>>
>>More problematic is the local density of states (I know
>>it is not really a dos but a bunch of dirac peaks).
>>In a dimer with the z axis along the direction connecting
>>the two atoms, the xy and x^2-y^2 dos should be degenerate
>>(if the supercell box is large enough).
>>In fact the xy and x^2-y^2 are degenerate if nbnd=12 or 25
>>but there is a rather large splitting if nbnd=20.
>>
>>I am quite sure the result for nbnd=20 is not correct but
>>what is the origin of this problem?
>>
>>Maybe I could try to use another diagonalization scheme..
>>
>>   thanks for reading my strange problems
>>
>>     cyrille
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>


-- 
==================================================================
Cyrille Barreteau  | phone : +33 (0)1 69 08 29 51
CEA Saclay         | fax   : +33 (0)1 69 08 84 46
DSM/DRECAM/SPCSI   | email cyrille.barreteau at cea.fr
Batiment 462       |
91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex  FRANCE
          ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www-drecam.cea.fr/spcsi/index.php
http://www-drecam.cea.fr/Images/Pisp/cbarreteau/cbarreteau_fr.html
http://www-drecam.cea.fr/Phocea/Membres/Cours/index.php
==================================================================