Re: [Wien] Basic question regarding mixing parameter & force optimization

2021-10-06 Thread shamik chakrabarti
Dear Prof. Marks, Thank you for your explanations Sir. Comments are very informative. with regards, On Wed, 6 Oct 2021 at 18:30, Laurence Marks wrote: > Some mixer and optimization comments, to clarify. > > 99.999% of cases where there are convergence problems are du

Re: [Wien] Basic question regarding mixing parameter & force optimization

2021-10-06 Thread Laurence Marks
Some mixer and optimization comments, to clarify. 99.999% of cases where there are convergence problems are due to: 1) Inappropriate physics. A bad model does not have to have a fixed-point solution, that is there may be no converged solution. (Nothing says there has to be.) 2) Inappropriate num

Re: [Wien] Basic question regarding mixing parameter & force optimization

2021-10-06 Thread Tran, Fabien
I think that the original question of Shamik concerns PORT, and not MSR1. In some cases, in particular with non-standard potentials, I could converge only with PORT and with a very small mixing (typically 0.02). Then, I was checking what happens if the calculation is restarted (after a save_lapw

Re: [Wien] Basic question regarding mixing parameter & force optimization

2021-10-06 Thread Laurence Marks
NEWT is obsolete. Also, as I said before, unfortunately Fabien's answer iwas not really right. 🤓 -- Professor Laurence Marks Department of Materials Science and Engineering Northwestern University www.numis.northwestern.edu "Research is to see what everybody else has seen, and to think what nobod

Re: [Wien] Basic question regarding mixing parameter & force optimization

2021-10-06 Thread Laurence Marks
On Wed, Oct 6, 2021, 2:20 AM Tran, Fabien wrote: > 0.01 should in principle leads to slower convergence, except of course if > 0.2 is too large and does not allow for convergence at all. > Sorry, but this is not how the mixing code works. The input parameter mainly controls the maximum unpredict

Re: [Wien] Basic question regarding mixing parameter & force optimization

2021-10-06 Thread shamik chakrabarti
Dear Prof. Tran, Sorry to bother you again. What about changing PORT to NEWT/NEW1 for force convergence? with regards, On Wed, 6 Oct 2021 at 12:57, shamik chakrabarti wrote: > Dear Prof. Tran, > > Thank you for your reply. It removes my confusion :) > > On

Re: [Wien] Basic question regarding mixing parameter & force optimization

2021-10-06 Thread shamik chakrabarti
Dear Prof. Tran, Thank you for your reply. It removes my confusion :) On Wed, 6 Oct 2021 at 12:50, Tran, Fabien wrote: > 0.01 should in principle leads to slower convergence, except of course if > 0.2 is too large and does not allow for convergence at all. > > If the convergence

Re: [Wien] Basic question regarding mixing parameter & force optimization

2021-10-06 Thread Tran, Fabien
0.01 should in principle leads to slower convergence, except of course if 0.2 is too large and does not allow for convergence at all. If the convergence can be achieved properly with 0.2 and 0.01, then the results should be identical. From: Wien on beha