<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJYci+RKJfW+p6yUkOG8cqW=M4DGbAmZr37XDrB32n0k5MZsnQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>I am doing mBJ calculation for a ternary
semiconductor. There are four options for
different parametrization of mBJ:<br>
<br>
</div>
0: Original.....<br>
</div>
1: New parametrization (Koller.........<br>
2: New parametrization for semiconductors ........<br>
</div>
3: Unmodified BJ potential (Backe.........)<br>
<br>
</div>
I got reasonable band gap using unmodified BJ potential,
option 3, than other options. <br>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">My query is that: Should I
put unmodified BJ potential as mBJ
potential in paper</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
No<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJYci+RKJfW+p6yUkOG8cqW=M4DGbAmZr37XDrB32n0k5MZsnQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr"> or write simply unmodified
BJ potential without mentioning mBJ
potential?<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Yes, but it should not be necessary to write unmodified. You could
simply mention that you used the Becke-Johnson (BJ) potential and
cite the article J. Chem. Phys. 124, 221101 (2006).<br>
</body>
</html>