Thank you both!
___
Quantum ESPRESSO is supported by MaX (www.max-centre.eu)
users mailing list users@lists.quantum-espresso.org
https://lists.quantum-espresso.org/mailman/listinfo/users
In principle, it doesn't matter: they are never (or should never be)
used. In practice, they are set to zero
Do not count of them being zero to do a lazy sum up to npwx, though.
Because sometime they are not guaranteed to be zero.
cheers
--
Lorenzo Paulatto - Paris
In principle, it doesn't matter: they are never (or should never be) used.
In practice, they are set to zero
Paolo
On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 12:39 AM Andrew Xu wrote:
> Thanks!
>
> Just out of curiosity, what values do the last npwx - npw entries of the
> column (row) take? Are they all zero?
>
Thanks!
Just out of curiosity, what values do the last npwx - npw entries of the
column (row) take? Are they all zero?
Best,
Andrew
___
Quantum ESPRESSO is supported by MaX (www.max-centre.eu)
users mailing list users@lists.quantum-espresso.org
On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 7:29 PM Andrew Xu wrote:
I'm confused why npw and npwx is used, instead of only npw or only npwx
>
npw = actual number of plane waves
npwx= physical dimension of arrays containing plane-wave components
The reason for the difference is that different k-points have
Hi users,
In section 7.1 of the developer's manual, the following example code is
shown:
COMPLEX, ALLOCATABLE :: ps(:,:), wfc(:,:), swfc(:,:)
ALLOCATE (ps(m,m), wfc(npwx,m),swfc(npwx,m))
CALL zgemm (’c’, ’n’, m, m, npw, (1.d0, 0.d0), wfc, &
npwx, swfc, npwx, (0.d0, 0.d0),
