<div dir="ltr"><div>Dear Martin,</div><div><br></div><div>The culprits are </div><div> ALIGN_FRAMES .TRUE.<br> ROTATE_FRAMES .TRUE.</div><div>If you change those to<br></div><div> ALIGN_FRAMES .FALSE.<br> ROTATE_FRAMES .FALSE.</div><div>both endpoint energies agree:</div><div>-934.347897297 -934.316490032 -934.289348456 -934.274499318 -934.304688658 -934.347897299</div><div><br></div><div>As far as I know, these two keywords are only to be used with molecules without periodic boundaries.</div><div><br></div><div>Best,</div><div>Fabian<br></div><br>On Saturday, 14 March 2020 14:02:47 UTC+1, Martin Brehm wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><div dir="ltr">Dear Community,<br><br>we performed a CP2K NEB calculation of a solid state system. The starting and ending configuration of the band are equivalent after wrapping coordinates into the primary image of the cell (just two atoms have changed place, one of them moving out of the primary image). This can easily be confirmed by running single point calculations of the starting and ending calculations - they yield identical energies in CP2k.<br><br>When we now perform the NEB calculation, the ending point unexpectedly yields a different total energy (too high by 13.1 kJ/mol). The starting and ending configuration cannot move during the NEB
optimization, as we specified "OPTIMIZE_END_POINTS .FALSE.". And the
energy of the starting and ending configuration remains constant during
the NEB optimization - the strange higher energy appears from the
beginning on. So this problem is probably not related to the NEB calculation itself.<br><br>Attached ("image_energy.png") you can find a plot of the total energy of the NEB images at some point during the NEB optimization, where the first and the last value should be identical.<br><br>We already checked the following:<br><br>(*) We tried to simply swap the starting and ending geometry. Then, again, the energy of the ending geometry is higher by the same amount (13.1 kJ/mol), and the energy of the starting geometry is correct this time. This confirms that both configurations are identical. Probably there is a bug which affects the energy calculation of the last image in a NEB calculation.<br><br>(*) We were able to reproduce this error on different computer systems, using different CP2k versions, from 2016 to recent versions.<br><br>(*) Even the contribution of the dispersion correction to the last NEB image is different than to the first one. This indicates that the issue is not related to the SCF calculation, but that somehow the geometry of the last image is not correct in the internal data structures.<br><br>The following files are attached to this post:<br><br>image_energy.png - Plot of the total energy of the NEB images at some point during the NEB optimization.<br>band.inp - Input file for the NEB run.<br><a href="http://start.xyz" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\x3dhttp%3A%2F%2Fstart.xyz\x26sa\x3dD\x26sntz\x3d1\x26usg\x3dAFQjCNFfmDWghDjOM3VrIh_1dqBAn-mIUw';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\x3dhttp%3A%2F%2Fstart.xyz\x26sa\x3dD\x26sntz\x3d1\x26usg\x3dAFQjCNFfmDWghDjOM3VrIh_1dqBAn-mIUw';return true;">start.xyz</a> - Starting configuration (first NEB image).<br><a href="http://end.xyz" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\x3dhttp%3A%2F%2Fend.xyz\x26sa\x3dD\x26sntz\x3d1\x26usg\x3dAFQjCNFXCNwmBvxnzW41N1RWOKVYw9Dkdw';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\x3dhttp%3A%2F%2Fend.xyz\x26sa\x3dD\x26sntz\x3d1\x26usg\x3dAFQjCNFXCNwmBvxnzW41N1RWOKVYw9Dkdw';return true;">end.xyz</a> - Ending configuration (last NEB image).<br><a href="http://coord.xyz" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\x3dhttp%3A%2F%2Fcoord.xyz\x26sa\x3dD\x26sntz\x3d1\x26usg\x3dAFQjCNFtfZMTV9SLHsLvFPLefSArd_qQ4w';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\x3dhttp%3A%2F%2Fcoord.xyz\x26sa\x3dD\x26sntz\x3d1\x26usg\x3dAFQjCNFtfZMTV9SLHsLvFPLefSArd_qQ4w';return true;">coord.xyz</a> - Again the coordinates for the "&COORD" section.<br>li12si7-BAND01.out - Beginning of the Log file for the first NEB image.<br>li12si7-BAND16.out - Beginning of the Log file for the last NEB image.<br><br>If you want to try to reproduce this strange behavior, you do not need to wait until the NEB calculation is converged. Already one or two geometry steps will be sufficient to check if the first and last (fixed) images have identical energies (as they should) or not.<br><br>Any recommendations are welcome.<br><br>Best regards,<br>Martin<br></div></blockquote></div>