On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:33 PM, Ilya Ryabinkin
wrote:
> So, the bottom line: ZGEMM and MATMUL should give the same, right?
>
If properly used, yes, they should give the same results.
> S is not distributed: CALL calbec( npw, evcold, evc, S ) computes
> > S(ibnd,jbnd)
So, the bottom line: ZGEMM and MATMUL should give the same, right?
--
I.
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Paolo Giannozzi wrote:
> S is not distributed: CALL calbec( npw, evcold, evc, S ) computes
> S(ibnd,jbnd) = \sum_{i=1}^npw evcold^*(i,ibnd) evc(i,jbnd)
>
> Paolo
>
S is not distributed: CALL calbec( npw, evcold, evc, S ) computes
S(ibnd,jbnd) = \sum_{i=1}^npw evcold^*(i,ibnd) evc(i,jbnd)
Paolo
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 9:54 PM, Ilya Ryabinkin
wrote:
> > If the matrix S is not distributed (and if you have a copy of it on each
> >
Dear Paolo,
1) v.5.4.0
2) serial
3) not applicable
4) yes, wf_collect = .True.
appreciate it.
Cheers
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Paolo Giannozzi
wrote:
> Dear Jia
>
> 1) which version of the code are you using?
> 2) parallel or serial execution?
> 3) if parallel,
> If the matrix S is not distributed (and if you have a copy of it on each
> processor), MATMUL (evc, S) will be distributed exactly in the same way as
> evc
How do I know if it is distributed? I got it through
CALL calbec( npw, evcold, evc, S )
--
I.
>
> Paol
>
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 9:16
If the matrix S is not distributed (and if you have a copy of it on each
processor), MATMUL (evc, S) will be distributed exactly in the same way as
evc
Paol
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Ilya Ryabinkin
wrote:
> Colleagues:
> I'm wondering what should I use to get the
Dear Jia
1) which version of the code are you using?
2) parallel or serial execution?
3) if parallel, are you writing to/reading from a parallel file system?
4) have you used the "wf_collect" option?
Paolo
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 8:41 PM, Jia Chen wrote:
> Dear All,
>
Colleagues:
I'm wondering what should I use to get the matrix product evc*S, where
evc = evc(npw, nbnd)
is a collection of MOs and
S = S(nbnd, nbnd)
if my code is executed on several MPI nodes?
I see that for for nproc >1
npw is actually npw/nproc, which brings a question what is
Dear All,
I am having troubles with restarting calculations with existing
wavefunctions. I have restart_mode = 'from_scratch', outdir = './' wfcdir
= './' and startingwfc = 'file'. Wave functions file are in
'./prefix.save/K00.../' And I keep getting error "wavefunctions unit
(iunwfc) is not
I had a similar problem and follow the below steps it will work.
1. As mentioned above k-point weight.
2. After SCF , you have to do the keyword 'band' calculations. Looks like
you are plotting band structure after nscf, without running 'band'
calculations.
3. Then do the bands.x calculations to
Dear Santosh,
I think the problem is in your nscf calculation. I think that you used the
wrong number of weights in k_points or the wrong setting of
k_points{setting}.
Sincerely,
Dae Kwang Jun
On Wednesday, 31 August 2016, Santosh Chiniwar
wrote:
>
>
> Dear Pw_forum,
Dear QE users,
I just worked example 1 in espresso-5.3.0/Environ/examples/ and obtained
the following result for a water molecule in water solvent:
!total energy = -34.06234148 Ry
Harris-Foulkes estimate = -33.95165940 Ry
estimated scf accuracy<
Dear Pw_forum,
I am trying to simulate silicon from tutorial. But I couldn't line
plot get on Bands.ps. But instead I got point spread.
[image: Inline images 1]
Bands.incode is following
prefix = 'Si_exc2'
outdir='./'
filband = 'siliconbands.dat'
/
and
plotbands.in
Download the CUDA
On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 11:00 AM, wrote:
> Send Pw_forum mailing list submissions to
> pw_forum@pwscf.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://pwscf.org/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum
> or, via email,
On Aug 30, 2016, at 10:22 PM, Ye Luo wrote:
> Maybe a check can be added to prevent users using old compilers in this case.
This can be done. Put on the list.
--
Filippo SPIGA ~ Quantum ESPRESSO Foundation ~ http://www.quantum-espresso.org
15 matches
Mail list logo