<div>Dear Viktor,</div><div><br></div><div>The output you attached shows for step 28:<br></div><div> Max. gradient = 0.0002958006<br> Conv. limit for gradients = 0.0004500000<br> Conv. in gradients = YES</div><div><br></div><div>So
that output is for MAX_FORCE 4.5E-4 and not 1.0E-7. You should also decrease EPS_SCF (to 1e-7 or 1e-8) and probably EPS_DEFAULT.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Fabian<br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="auto" class="gmail_attr">On Wednesday, 26 January 2022 at 21:12:03 UTC+1 volk...@gmail.com wrote:<br/></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0 0 0 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><div dir="ltr"><div>Dear Fabian:</div><div>please forgive me</div><div><br></div><div><b>If I set</b></div><div> OPTIMIZER BFGS</div></div><div dir="ltr"><div><br> MAX_DR 8.0E-06<br> RMS_DR 4.0E-06 <br> MAX_FORCE 1.0E-06<br> RMS_FORCE 1.0E-07</div></div><div dir="ltr"><div></div><div><b>then the forces are</b></div><div><b>
</b>ATOMIC FORCES in [a.u.]
</div><div> # Atom Kind Element X Y Z<br> 1 1 Na 0.00000796 0.00000796 0.00000796<br> 2 1 Na 0.00000796 0.00001127 0.00001127<br> 3 1 Na 0.00001127 0.00000796 0.00001127<br> 4 1 Na 0.00001127 0.00001127 0.00000796<br> 5 2 Cl 0.00000052 0.00000052 0.00000052<br> 6 2 Cl 0.00000052 0.00000052 0.00000052<br> 7 2 Cl 0.00000052 0.00000052 0.00000052<br> 8 2 Cl 0.00000052 0.00000052 0.00000052<br> SUM OF ATOMIC FORCES 0.00004056 0.00004056 0.00004056 0.00007026</div><div><br></div><div><b>and the soectrum is terrible (please, see the attached xxx_F.out)</b><br></div><div><br></div><div><b>Then I try to instruct more strict convregence by</b></div><div> OPTIMIZER BFGS<br> MAX_DR 8.0E-07<br> RMS_DR 4.0E-07 <br> MAX_FORCE 1.0E-07<br> RMS_FORCE 1.0E-08</div><div><br></div><div><b>but the forces deteriorate</b><br></div><div>ATOMIC FORCES in [a.u.]<br> # Atom Kind Element X Y Z<br> 1 1 Na 0.00009945 0.00009945 0.00009945<br> 2 1 Na 0.00025879 -0.00001513 -0.00001513<br> 3 1 Na -0.00001519 0.00025872 -0.00001518<br> 4 1 Na -0.00001513 -0.00001513 0.00025879<br> 5 2 Cl 0.00031492 0.00004422 0.00004422<br> 6 2 Cl 0.00024177 0.00024177 0.00024177<br> 7 2 Cl 0.00004422 0.00004422 0.00031492<br> 8 2 Cl 0.00004422 0.00031492 0.00004422<br> SUM OF ATOMIC FORCES 0.00097305 0.00097303 0.00097305 0.00168536</div><div><br></div><div><b>I attach the optimization inp and out pair.</b><br></div><div><b>I donot see what is wrong?</b></div><div><b>May be GPW and BFGS are not for such optimizations? <br></b></div><div><b>Thank you.</b></div><div><b>Victor</b><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 4:22 PM <a href data-email-masked rel="nofollow">fabia...@gmail.com</a> <<a href data-email-masked rel="nofollow">fabia...@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div>Dear Victor,</div><div><br></div><div>You need a much tighter convergence criterion for the optimization prior to the vibrational analysis. You increased
<span>MAX_FORCE to 5e-3 (guessing from the output), instead you have to decrease it to at least 1e-5, maybe even lower.<br></span></div><div><span>CP2K prints the forces for the replica in the output. The forces under "Minimum Structure - Energy and Forces:" should be more or less 0 and considerably differ between the other images.<span> Currently you are computing the vibrational analysis from almost pure noise.</span>
</span></div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Fabian<br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="auto" class="gmail_attr">On Sunday, 23 January 2022 at 19:58:05 UTC+1 <a href data-email-masked rel="nofollow">volk...@gmail.com</a> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Dear colleagues:<br>here is the normal mode analysis I could manage by now for NaCl under PBC.<br><br>There is only one unit cell: previously, I reported that I could not configure CP2K to reproduce NaCl structure using multiple cells 2 2 2.<br>There are strange distortions, which I did confirm to sustain under different CUTOFF values (1000 and 600), and regardless if dispersion is switched off or not.<br><br>When a single cell under PBC, optimization leads to the “right” structure, when ESP 10^-12.<br><br>However, the negative(imaginary) frequencies are many and they are very large.<br>I may anticipate that the “miss performance” is enhanced due to the PBC.<br><div><br></div><div>Eventhough the results are "devastating",</div><div>:-)<br></div>nonetheless, I find this might be very good, very helpful – I got an idea.<br><br>Dear Dr. Hutter,<br>is it possible that CP2K may have an “issue” about positioning a structure <br>in respect to both, in respect to the FT grind and in respect to the PBC.<br>Perhaps, there could be a relative mismatch phenomenon, which could stimulate artificial transition states with negative frequencies?<br><br><div>May be, what I observe is that PBC on the unit cell helps to sense this better?</div><div><br></div><br>Thank you for your time and for any comments.<br><div><br></div><div>With best regards,</div>Sincerely<br>Victor<br></blockquote></div>
<p></p></blockquote></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
-- <br></blockquote></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "cp2k" group.<br>
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit <a href="https://groups.google.com/d/topic/cp2k/bAo0CtNixo8/unsubscribe" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en-GB&q=https://groups.google.com/d/topic/cp2k/bAo0CtNixo8/unsubscribe&source=gmail&ust=1643359828918000&usg=AFQjCNE9Cg5s9FU7MSh4ts7Pr_yEtDBEmg">https://groups.google.com/d/topic/cp2k/bAo0CtNixo8/unsubscribe</a>.<br>
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to <a href data-email-masked rel="nofollow">cp2k+uns...@googlegroups.com</a>.<br>
To view this discussion on the web visit <a href="https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cp2k/dd5077c3-4bac-4fa0-a81d-ef779f43e157n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en-GB&q=https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cp2k/dd5077c3-4bac-4fa0-a81d-ef779f43e157n%2540googlegroups.com?utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dfooter&source=gmail&ust=1643359828918000&usg=AFQjCNHfE-EL-Y0eCFrxIw20GxizrERc4A">https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cp2k/dd5077c3-4bac-4fa0-a81d-ef779f43e157n%40googlegroups.com</a>.<br>
</blockquote></div></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cp2k" group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to <a href="mailto:cp2k+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">cp2k+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To view this discussion on the web visit <a href="https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cp2k/d036e57c-90aa-4656-85d8-ce7e1d917d8cn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer">https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cp2k/d036e57c-90aa-4656-85d8-ce7e1d917d8cn%40googlegroups.com</a>.<br />