Page 1 of 1
Problem DFT+U vector magnetization
Posted: Tue Mar 17, 2015 3:37 pm
by alexzai
Hallo
In new ABINIT 7.10.4 version remain the same problems with calculation of U-correction with nspden=4.
Best regards
Alex
Re: Problem DFT+U vector magnetization
Posted: Fri May 29, 2015 10:01 am
by amadon
Dear Alex,
Sorry for the delay.
What is the problem with the DFT+U vector magnetization with nspden=4 ?
Best regards
Bernard Amadon
PS: Could you give your name and affiliation, thanks!
Re: Problem DFT+U vector magnetization
Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 7:48 pm
by alexzai
Thank you for the answer.
The problem is definition of U-parameter in antiferromagnetic system with spin-orbit coupling. At calculation of U-parameter with spin-orbit-coupling the result consist of zeros and arises errors in .out file: "Matrix response chi_0 is singular Probably too many symmetries kept Matrix response chi is singular Probably too many symmetries kept" and warning in .log file:
"-- !WARNING
message: |
LDA+U+SpinOrbit is still on test
(not yet in production)
src_file: chkinp.F90
src_line: 2591"
My system is very asymmetrical and the further reduction of symmetry is not possible. I see, that this function unfortunately today is not realized and hope to realisation in future. Know you other methods of U parameter in the systems definition? Now i can run only the collinear calculation.
Best regards
Alexander Zaichenko
Göttingen
Re: Problem DFT+U vector magnetization
Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2015 8:40 am
by amadon
Dear Alexander,
Sorry, I was missing your point. The calculation of U within cRPA is implemented in ABINIT only if nspinor=1 (collinear case). It
was not written in the doc. So I have just updated it now (input variable: ucrpa) in the doc.
Best regards
Bernard
Re: Problem DFT+U vector magnetization
Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2015 1:39 pm
by alexzai
Thank you for the fast answer
But i have used linear response method, not RPA and i did not know, that in GW calculation is the same problem.
Best regards
Alexander
Re: Problem DFT+U vector magnetization
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 1:20 pm
by amadon
In fact, my point is that the calculation of the effective Coulomb Interaction U with the constrained Random Phase Approximation (cRPA)
is not implemented in the case nspinor=2. (I am not discussing GW calculations in general).
Concerning the linear response method to compute U, to my knowledge, it was also not implemented in non collinear case.
Best regards
Bernard