[CP2K:4972] Re: Geometry optimisation converges to nonsense
mba... at gmx.net
Thu Feb 20 09:35:13 UTC 2014
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 11:29:02PM -0800, Florian Schiffmann wrote:
> this is clearly a cutoff problem (100 is way too low for whatever you want
> to do). This leads to translational invariance with respect to the grid and
> artificial minima arise simply from the atomic positions relative to the
> grid which explains the strange "minimal energy" geometry you observe.
> Looks to me like you created your input from one of the regtest files. Keep
> in mind there, the regtest are tuned for speed not for meaningful results.
> They are simply consistency checks for which convergence doesn't matter.
> For more meaningful inputs have a look at the benchmarks but even there
> they are not meant for high quality results.
While this should be clear to all users, it might make sense to have a
few example files which are production-ready for people to base their
ideas on, clearly seperating them from the regtests, e.g. in a top-level
More information about the CP2K-user