<div>Hi Diego,</div><div><br /></div><div>In QE you have (almost certainly) used semearing too. It can be used with semiconductors just as well as with metals. Between each geometry optimization step there is an energy minimization, did these all converge?<br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Cheers<br /></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="auto" class="gmail_attr">On Tuesday, 13 June 2023 at 12:24:45 UTC+2 Diego López 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;">Hi Fabian,<div><br></div><div>Thanks for your answer. My system is a semiconductor so I think that smearing is not a good choice for my calculations. Using QE I obtained a good approximation of the magnetic moments of the system and also a reasonable geometry optimization. What do you mean with convergence of individual scf steps?</div><div><br></div><div>Best,</div><div>Diego <br><br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="auto" class="gmail_attr">El martes, 13 de junio de 2023 a las 12:03:06 UTC+2, <a href data-email-masked rel="nofollow">fabia...@gmail.com</a> escribió:<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>Hi Diego,</div><div><br></div><div>I have not used RELAX_MULTIPLICITY myself, you can give it a try. You could also use DIAGONALIZATION together with SMEAR then the spins are not fixed by default. What spin population did you obtain with vasp and QE?<br></div><div><br></div><div>Have you also checked that all the individual scf between the geometry optimization steps are converged?<br></div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Fabian<br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="auto" class="gmail_attr">On Tuesday, 13 June 2023 at 10:17:28 UTC+2 Diego López 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">Dear Fabian,<div><br></div><div>I am using this specific multiplicity because experimental data suggests that this is the magnetic ground state, but I am not obtaining the proper magnetic moments on the Fe atoms. Should I try using RELAX_MULTIPLICITY?</div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>Diego<br><br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="auto" class="gmail_attr">El sábado, 10 de junio de 2023 a las 19:26:46 UTC+2, Fabian Ducry escribió:<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><div dir="auto">Hi Diego,<br><br>are you sure that MULTIPLICITY 301 is correct? <br><br>Cheers,<br>Fabian<br></div></div><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="auto">On 10 June 2023 16:26:05 GMT+01:00, Lobna Saeed <<a rel="nofollow">lobna...@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto">And also please do energy convergence tests. Dont try to increase your pw cutoff values randomly. </div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat 10. Jun 2023 at 17:25, Lobna Saeed <<a rel="nofollow">lobna...@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto">The minimizer DIIS is not reliable. This OT method is not always converging with me and when converges doesnt give accurate enough numbers. Therefore, please try to switch to diagonalization.</div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri 9. Jun 2023 at 16:44, Diego López <<a rel="nofollow">diego...@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)">Hi
<span style="font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif;letter-spacing:0.25px;color:rgb(32,33,36)">Marcella,</span><div><font face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(32,33,36)"><span style="letter-spacing:0.25px;font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif"><br></span></font></div><div><font face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(32,33,36)"><span style="letter-spacing:0.25px;font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif">Thanks for your answer. I tried with PW cutoff of 1000 and with TZVP basis set but the result is the same<br></span></font><br></div><div>Regards</div><div>Diego</div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="auto" class="gmail_attr">El viernes, 9 de junio de 2023 a las 16:38:41 UTC+2, Marcella Iannuzzi escribió:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)"><div><br></div><div><br></div>Hi, <div><br></div><div>I would start by using better basis sets (e.g., DZVP, <span style="font-family:Menlo;font-size:15px;color:rgb(0,0,0)">TZVP) and increasing the PW cutoff </span></div><div><br></div><div>Regards</div><div>Marcella </div><div><br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="auto" class="gmail_attr">On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 1:00:42 PM UTC+2 Diego López wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)">Dear CP2K users,<div><br></div><div>I am kind of new using cp2k but I have been using the software fo a couple of months. I am trying to optimize both geometry and cell parameters of different semiconductor material but the obtained geometries are distorted compared with experimental data or relaxed geometries obtained using Quantum Espresso or VASP. </div><div><br></div><div>My optimized geometries have a lack of symmetry compared with experimental data, i.e. the atoms that should be aligned in an especific axis tend to alternate the positions in the crystal, so my results are no compatible with the expected ones.</div><div><br></div><div>Which parameters should I change in my calculations? I tried lowering the EPS_SCF to increase accuracy, increasing the supercell and using larger basis sets but the result does not change. I attatch an example of input that I used for these calculations.</div><div><br></div><div>&GLOBAL<br> PROJECT<br> RUN_TYPE CELL_OPT<br> PRINT_LEVEL MEDIUM<br>&END GLOBAL<br><br>&FORCE_EVAL<br> METHOD Quickstep ! Electronic structure method (DFT,...)<br> STRESS_TENSOR ANALYTICAL<br> &DFT<br> BASIS_SET_FILE_NAME BASIS_MOLOPT<br> POTENTIAL_FILE_NAME GTH_POTENTIALS<br> MULTIPLICITY 301<br> UKS<br> &POISSON ! Solver requested for non periodic calculations<br> PERIODIC XYZ<br> &END POISSON<br> &XC<br> &XC_FUNCTIONAL PBE<br> &PBE<br> PARAMETRIZATION PBESOL<br> &END<br> &END XC_FUNCTIONAL<br> &END XC<br> &SCF<br> SCF_GUESS ATOMIC<br> MAX_SCF 40<br> EPS_SCF 3E-06<br> &OT<br> PRECONDITIONER FULL_KINETIC<br> MINIMIZER CG<br> &END OT<br> &OUTER_SCF<br> MAX_SCF 320<br> EPS_SCF 3E-06<br> &END<br> &END SCF<br> &MGRID<br> NGRIDS 4<br> CUTOFF 550<br> REL_CUTOFF 90<br> &END MGRID<br> &QS<br> METHOD GPW<br> EXTRAPOLATION ASPC<br> EPS_DEFAULT 1E-014<br> &END<br> &END DFT<br> &SUBSYS<br> &CELL<br> ABC 3.601367151 4.818258107 25.0<br> ALPHA_BETA_GAMMA 90 90 90<br> PERIODIC XYZ<br> SYMMETRY ORTHORHOMBIC<br> MULTIPLE_UNIT_CELL 5 5 1<br> &END CELL<br> &TOPOLOGY ! Section used to center the atomic coordinates in the given box. Useful for big molecules<br> COORD_FILE_FORMAT xyz<br> COORD_FILE_NAME ./<a href="http://crsbr.xyz" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en-GB&q=http://crsbr.xyz&source=gmail&ust=1686738550726000&usg=AOvVaw3KurmssyPj2aIbZVuwC6Mm">crsbr.xyz</a><br> MULTIPLE_UNIT_CELL 5 5 1<br> &END<br> &KIND Cr<br> ELEMENT Cr<br> BASIS_SET SZV-MOLOPT-SR-GTH<br> POTENTIAL GTH-PBE-q14<br> MAGNETIZATION 3.0<br> &END KIND<br> &KIND S<br> ELEMENT S<br> BASIS_SET SZV-MOLOPT-GTH<br> POTENTIAL GTH-PBE-q6<br> &END KIND<br> &KIND Br<br> ELEMENT Br<br> BASIS_SET SZV-MOLOPT-SR-GTH<br> POTENTIAL GTH-PBE-q7<br> &END KIND<br> &END SUBSYS<br>&END FORCE_EVAL<br>&MOTION<br> &CELL_OPT<br> TYPE DIRECT_CELL_OPT<br> MAX_ITER 200<br> OPTIMIZER LBFGS<br> KEEP_SYMMETRY<br> &END CELL_OPT<br>&END MOTION<br></div><div><br></div><div>Thanks in advanced</div></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 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/fb6271ad-4513-41a8-a08c-f20b5c23e849n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en-GB&q=https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cp2k/fb6271ad-4513-41a8-a08c-f20b5c23e849n%2540googlegroups.com?utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dfooter&source=gmail&ust=1686738550726000&usg=AOvVaw3Rq48KQaeNrBZKzur0Rk6K">https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cp2k/fb6271ad-4513-41a8-a08c-f20b5c23e849n%40googlegroups.com</a>.<br>
</blockquote></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div>
<p></p></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div></blockquote></div></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/d5bb8a8e-c671-43d4-a93d-56c63d2a4512n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer">https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cp2k/d5bb8a8e-c671-43d4-a93d-56c63d2a4512n%40googlegroups.com</a>.<br />