Actually, another method exists. After every relaxation step
SystemLabel.STRUCT_OUT file with atomic coordinates and lattice
vectors is created. Just rename it to SystemLabel.STRUCT_IN and enable
MD.UseStructFile true

On 16/10/2007, Semichaevsky, Andrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Vasilii,
>
> Thanks for your reply.
> Yes, I did turn the MD.UseSaveCG flag on. Something is not working with the 
> CG algorithm.
> Will try (second order?) Broyden's method instead.
>
> Andrey
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Siesta, Self-Consistent DFT LCAO program, http://www.uam.es/siesta on 
> behalf of Vasilii Artyukhov
> Sent: Tue 10/16/2007 4:07 AM
> To: SIESTA-L@listserv.uam.es
> Subject: Re: [SIESTA-L] Lattice relaxation and band structure calculations 
> for In2O3
>
>
> 1) Did you turn the MD.UseSaveCG flag on? Also, you might want to try 
> MD.TypeOfRun Broyden, in my experience this is really superior to CG.
> 1) ???
>
> 2007/10/16, Semichaevsky, Andrey < [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL 
> PROTECTED]> >:
>
>         Dear Siesta users,
>
>         I have two questions related to the calculation of the electronic 
> structure of In2O3 in Siesta:
>         1) The optimization of the atomic positions using the MD/CG method 
> results in very long runs
>         for 80 atoms using the DZP basis, and the wallclock time limit is 
> exhausted.
>
>         The CG after a restart seems to take the last updated DM results, 
> but, for some reason, it i
>         s not able to reuse all the optimization-related parameters. So, 
> after each restart,
>         the CG iterations start essentially from the the new initial point 
> every time.
>         This makes it very difficult to achieve an unambiguous convergence to 
> just one (global) minimum.
>         Is there any way for the CG to reuse its most recent sets of 
> parameters.
>
>         2) The number of bands in the valence is 192, for spin-unpolarized 
> calculations, irrespective of the numerical orbital basis used (SZ or DZP). 
> Does this number have any physical explanation? -
>         I know that other codes, i.e., FLAPW produce 92 valence bands instead.
>
>         Thanks.
>
>         Regrads,
>
>         Andrey Semichaevsky
>


-- 
Yurko Natanzon
PhD Student
Henryk Niewodniczański Institute of Nuclear Physics
Polish Academy of Sciences
ul. Radzikowskiego 152,
31-342 Kraków, Poland
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to