Menu

On calculating the DOS

Elk Users
Harry K
2018-01-29
2018-02-19
  • Harry K

    Harry K - 2018-01-29

    Hi All,

    I'm a little confused about how the DOS calculation works. I assumed that task 10 is a primarily post-processing task and hence that it is relatively fast. So I've done a converged self-consistent ground state calculation, and then want to use the following input file to do a non-self-consistent calculation on a denser grid, then calculate the DOS.
    The problem is that this is taking a very long time. The nscf calculation part goes fine and finishes, but it seems to get stuck on task 10 for so long that none of my calculations have even finished (even with the wplot parameters turned down so low as below). Time wise, the one below failed to finish when given 48 hrs to run and MPI parallelised over 192 cores. Sorry I can't give any more specific timing info.

    Am I missing something here? Any help is appreciated.

    Harry

    tasks
    1
    10
    
    xctype
    20
    
    dosmsum
    true
    
    mixtype
    3
    
    swidth
    0.005
    
    epsengy
    0.00001
    
    autolinengy
    true
    
    rgkmax
    8
    
    gmaxvr
    12
    
    spinorb
    true
    
    spinpol
    true
    
    maxscl
    1
    
    nempty
    12
    
    sppath
    '/work/y07/y07/cse/elk/elk-4.0.15/species/'
    
    avec
    13.44410000       0.000000000       0.000000000
    0.000000000       8.428400000       0.000000000
    0.000000000       0.000000000       14.71210000
    
    reducebf
    0.5
    
    atoms
    3                                    : nspecies
    'Pr.in'                                  : spfname
    4                                    : natoms; atpos, bfcmt below
    0.025400   0.250000   0.318300   0.00001   0.0   0.0
    0.974600   0.750000   0.681700   0.00001   0.0   0.0
    0.474600   0.750000   0.818300   0.00001   0.0   0.0
    0.525400   0.250000   0.181700   0.00001   0.0   0.0
    'Pt.in'                                 : spfname
    4                                    : natoms; atpos, bfcmt below
    0.281500   0.250000   0.612900
    0.718500   0.750000   0.387100
    0.218500   0.750000   0.112900
    0.781500   0.250000   0.887100
    'Al.in'                                 : spfname
    4                                    : natoms; atpos, bfcmt below
    0.147900   0.250000   0.934300
    0.852100   0.750000   0.065700
    0.352100   0.750000   0.434300
    0.647900   0.250000   0.565700
    
    ngridk
    18 36 18
    
    wplot
    200
    50
    2
    -0.4 0.2
    
     

    Last edit: Harry K 2018-01-30
  • Harry K

    Harry K - 2018-02-12

    Does anyone have any tips on this? Perhaps I have a misunderstanding of wplot

     
  • Muhammad Avicenna Naradipa

    Hi Harry,

    wplot is dependent of the k-point. If you look at the logfile, the calculation of DOS and band structure (task 20) is only using one core. I think this is because of the huge number of k-points that you have combined with only one core to integrate all of the k-points.

    I usually leave wplot to default, it should be sufficient. I tried increasing the nwplot to 1000 and my calculation also took a long time.

    Best,
    Cenna

     
  • Harry K

    Harry K - 2018-02-13

    So is my non-self-consistent calculation necessary? Or is it sufficient to do a normal, self-consistent, converged ground state and then rely on wplot to do the finer interpolation of the Brillouin zone?

     
  • Muhammad Avicenna Naradipa

    Dear Harry,

    Depends on what you need. If you want DOS, band structure, etc. then you need the non-SC calculation.

    Or is it sufficient to do a normal, self-consistent, converged ground state and then rely on wplot to do the finer interpolation of the Brillouin zone?

    If you do a normal (i.e. small k-point sampling) then you'd get a normal DOS. Increaseing the parameters in wplot would just make the points smaller but I don't think this would increase the actual shape or resultion of the DOS. It would just take longer to calculate and you'd get like hundreds of points for the same data.

    I think for resultion you should rely on k-point sampling AND swidth. You can read about it in previous posts in the forum.

    Best,
    Cenna

     

Log in to post a comment.