[Wien] Okay to combine mBJ, spinorbit, and LDA+U?

[Zhiyong Zhu]

Dear Prof. Laurence Marks,

I have a question about the force minimization in mBJ calculations.
According to the Userguide, the forces in mBJ calculations are not
correct, which means that the lattice relaxation using forces on atoms
in mBJ calculations is impossible. According to your description below,
however, it seems that the lattice relaxation is possible even in mBJ
calculations, if we use MSR1a in *.inm file. Is my understanding correct?

Another question is about the force minimization in calculations with
spin-orbit coupling. According to the wien2k website
(http://www.wien2k.at/reg_user/limitations/), lattice relaxation in calculations
with spin-orbit coupling is also not possible, because the Pulay corrections
to the forces are not correct in the presence of spin-orbit coupling.
So my concern is that whether the MSR1a option in *.inm file can overcome
this problem?

Thank you very much.

Regards,
Zhiyong Zhu

On 8/16/12, Laurence Marks <L-marks at northwestern.edu> wrote:
> If it is a decent insulator I would do LDA+U directly; often it
> converges better and since the lattice parameter and forces change you
> do not gain much by first doing LDA/GGA. Normally LDA+U is stable,
> often more stable that LDA/GGA. Volume optimization should be done
> first, then min_lapw or MSR1a. Better is to do MSR1a or min_lapw at
> each volume.
>
> Then add -so, mBJ as appropriate with the optimized positions.
> However, I not sure if mBJ+U is appropriate (I doubt that it is). It
> might be that LDA+U positions are a better approximation for mBJ, not
> sure. One way is to minimize the forces with mBJ using MSR1a (not
> min_lapw/PORT) and compare them to LDA+U. If they are the same then
> you are in good shape, needs testing. Maybe someone has....
>
> N.B., it is completely fine to minimize positions in mBJ using MRS1a
> -- do not use min_lapw/PORT, it will not be correct. MSR1a does not
> care that the energy is incorrect whereas min_lapw/PORT does.
>
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 2:44 PM, Jeff Spirko <spirko at lehigh.edu> wrote:
>> Is it okay to use spinorbit and LDA+U with mBJ?
>>
>> I would guess it is done like this:
>>  * Check that forces <10 mRy/au with plain LDA or GGA.  Reduce via
>> min_lapw.
>>  * Volume optimization (if desired) with plain LDA or GGA to reduce
>> absolute pressure.
>>  * Set up LDA+U (Sec 4.5.6) and use -orb flag from now on.
>>  * Need to converge LDA+U???
>>  * Follow mBJ instructions (Sec 4.5.9).
>>  * After mBJ+LDA+U is converged, follow spinorbit instructions (Sec
>> 4.5.5).
>>  * For spinpolarized, check whether atoms became nonequivalent
>> (affects case.inso, case.inorb,
>>     case.indmc, case.in1c, basically any input file with atom lists or
>> indices)
>>  * touch .fulldiag (necessary because klist can change???)
>>  * Do final run with -so -orb
>>
>> Best regards,
>> --
>> Jeff Spirko   spirko at lehigh.edu   WD3V   |=>
>>
>> The study of non-linear physics is like the study of non-elephant
>> biology.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wien mailing list
>> Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
>> http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
>
>
>
> --
> Professor Laurence Marks
> Department of Materials Science and Engineering
> Northwestern University
> www.numis.northwestern.edu 1-847-491-3996
> "Research is to see what everybody else has seen, and to think what
> nobody else has thought"
> Albert Szent-Gyorgi
> _______________________________________________
> Wien mailing list
> Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
> http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
>

-- 

------------------------------
This message and its contents, including attachments are intended solely 
for the original recipient. If you are not the intended recipient or have 
received this message in error, please notify me immediately and delete 
this message from your computer system. Any unauthorized use or 
distribution is prohibited. Please consider the environment before printing 
this email.