-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 138
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Symmetry for magnetic calculation #5786
Comments
I move it from the Discussions so it gets more attention in the Issues. |
Thanks. @dyzheng @WHUweiqingzhou any thoughts? |
@kluophysics Hello, how about the k-points after symmetry is on, does ABACUS differ from QE or VASP? |
@dyzheng They are the same, all being 8x8x8 Monkhorst-Pack kmesh. Increasing to 12x12x12 does not change much. |
I have checked code of |
I will try to fix it, or turn off symmetry analysis for magnetic calculations. |
Could you be more specific? Maybe point to the lines of code that are relevant for the record. Thanks! |
Discussed in #5780
Originally posted by kluophysics December 29, 2024
I recently tried a system with STRU file
In INPUT I have collinear calculation
The ending magnetic moments are
The magnetic moments of each species are not identical but somewhat close. In contrast, I checked against VASP and QE. Each code (QE and VASP) gives the same magnetic moments for Mn atom and Cr atom (as well as S atom in this case), respectively. Why is it so since symmetry is imposed?
A side note is that the magnetic moments are different from those obtained in VASP and QE. For record,
QE xml output has
VASP give closer moments, though different from QE and I suspect the pseudopotentials are really different. For QE, I used ONCV of PBE type while the PAW is quite unique. So VASP is not directly comparable, out of the game. For QE and Abacus, both used the same ONCV pseudopotentials and PBE xc functionals, they differ by 0.8 for Mn and 0.4 for Cr. I used DZP basis set and 100 Ry energy cutoff. Hope someone could give me some insight and that would be greatly appreciated!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: