Dear Adel, Thank you for your quick reply!
I am sceptical about the results my method 1 yields, because depending on how I define the "cut" function I obtain either a positiv or negativ current density profil. Furthermore I would expect for zero magnetic field no current density at all and even more critical I would expect vanishing total current (no bias applied). Because the model is totally time reversal symmetric. I made a minimal example highlighting these differences: https://github.com/Quaki96/KwantQuestion_2D-current-density-profile-through-3D-nanowire-cut/blob/8e46cebd463e04a1ef9c2c904a4c6c4dc2dea87f/current_density_minimal_example_Method1.ipynb the only difference here is the definition of the "cut" function either defined as def cut(site0,site1): return site0.pos[0]==x_cut and site1.pos[0]==x_cut +1 or as def cut(site0,site1): return site0.pos[0]==x_cut+1 and site1.pos[0]==x_cut For the second method. It seems like that the interpolation increases somehow the number of sites, (probably for some interpolation reasons) but I think the labelling modulo some shift is #field[ x integer lattice position index, y integerlattice position index, z integer lattice position index, vec field]. I agree some explanation or an improved documentation would be really desirable. Happy Kwanting Felix
