Re: [QE-users] Why do I get the message no atomic wavefunctions in pseudopotential?

2023-03-03 Thread Kazume NISHIDATE
> 2023/03/03 20:21、Iurii TIMROV via users > のメール: > > But hybrids with US and PAW in QE are slow as far as I know It is also true in the VASP. I was a ‘usr'. 西館数芽 Kazume NISHIDATE Ph.D Department of Systems Innovation Engineering, Graduate School of Science and Engineering, Iwate

Re: [QE-users] Why do I get the message no atomic wavefunctions in pseudopotential?

2023-03-03 Thread Iurii TIMROV via users
For GGA and GGA+U there are quite a few options, but I recommend to have a look here: https://www.materialscloud.org/discover/sssp/table/efficiency For PBE0, you can also try the ones mentioned above. But hybrids with US and PAW in QE are slow as far as I know, so better to try NC (maybe

Re: [QE-users] Why do I get the message no atomic wavefunctions in pseudopotential?

2023-03-03 Thread Iurii TIMROV via users
The attached input file does not correspond to GGA+U calculation but to PBE0. Anyways, you should change the pseudopotentials for Hubbard atoms because the ones that you use seem do not contain the atomic orbitals which are needed to construct Hubbard projectors of GGA+U. HTH Iurii --