Re: [Wien] Simultaeneous optimization of atomic coordinates with lattice parameters

2020-08-12 Thread Laurence Marks
>From a Google search "*Acceptable results* means a variance of less than plus or minus two (2) standard deviations". Remembering that (depending upon functional) there is a nett contraction/expansion, what is the standard deviation of your measurements and is your calculation within two sigma ?

Re: [Wien] Simultaeneous optimization of atomic coordinates with lattice parameters

2020-08-12 Thread shamik chakrabarti
Dear Prof. Laurence Marks Sir, Thank you for your email. Sir, we have obtained the following results by using the above procedure; Expt. Theory a=12.134 a=11.8071 b= 3.87 b=3.8838 c= 11.23 c=10.9285 Whether these

Re: [Wien] Simultaeneous optimization of atomic coordinates with lattice parameters

2020-08-12 Thread Laurence Marks
I have an impression that you have asked before about optimization, in fact many times! A question you should ask yourself is what are you trying to achieve? DFT is not a perfect theory, and while you can improve the agreement with experiment using better (and slower) methods, in general

Re: [Wien] Simultaeneous optimization of atomic coordinates with lattice parameters

2020-08-12 Thread shamik chakrabarti
Also after obtaining the c/a optimized struct file with optimized lattice parameter & nearly optimized atomic coordinates for a hexagonal system I do a force minimization by keeping the lattice parameter intact (as obtained from c/a optimization curve). Whether this will give a wrong minima? with

Re: [Wien] Simultaeneous optimization of atomic coordinates with lattice parameters

2020-08-12 Thread shamik chakrabarti
Dear Prof. Blaha, I have done some calculations by keeping both lines active. What it does; (!) It runs first runsp_lapw -ec 0.0001 for a given struct file (2) After getting the energy convergence, it does the force minimization for the given structure & saves the successive

Re: [Wien] Simultaeneous optimization of atomic coordinates with lattice parameters

2020-08-12 Thread Peter Blaha
You certainly don't want both lines active. For a simultaneous optimization of internal coordinates, the recommended command in optimize.job is to add -min to the run-command: runsp_lapw -nlvdw -fc 1 -ec 0.001 -min An older alternative (usually not recommended) is: min -I -j "runsp_lapw

Re: [Wien] Wien post from pascal.bou...@univ-amu.fr

2020-08-12 Thread Peter Blaha
Your message is too big to be accepted. Anyway, the DGEMM messages seem to be a relict of the mkl you are using, and most likely is related to the use of too many mpi-cores for such a small matrix. At least when I continue your Mg2Si calculations (in k-parallel mode) the :DIS and :ENE are

[Wien] Simultaeneous optimization of atomic coordinates with lattice parameters

2020-08-12 Thread shamik chakrabarti
Dear Wien2k users, I have edited the optimized.job by uncommenting the following two lines for running simultaneous optimization of atomic coordinates with a,b,c: runsp_lapw -nlvdw -ec 0.0001 min -I -j "runsp_lapw -nlvdw -I -fc 1.0 -i 40 " Is this