Menu

Elk functionals vs. Libxc functionals

Elk Users
2017-05-16
2017-05-16
  • Andrew Shyichuk

    Andrew Shyichuk - 2017-05-16

    Hi,

    I am going to do some research with geometry optimization in Abinit and then electronic properties analysis with Elk. For that, I must use the same functionals in both codes. Yes, I can simply use the same libxc and do not care, but I just want to know.

    The default Elk functional is PW92 exchange-corellation. As far as I could see from the code, it follows the original PW92 paper [1]. Perdew and Wang introduced a correlation functional, while they apparently used Hartree-Fock-based exchange[2]. The question is, if I used Libxc LDA_X exchange [3] with Libxc PW92 correlation, would I get the same functionals and the same results, as with elk's xctype=3? The problem is that the exchange energy formula in [1] and in elk differs from the one in [2,3] by the factor of 2. Is that correct and/or what do I miss?

    The question also extends to other built-in functionals in Elk. Is physics in Elk versions and Libxc versions the same?

    I used elk-4.0.15, gonna use 4.3.6.

    Thanks.

    UPD: As Lars Nordström noticed above, the factor of 2 is units differece. So, Libxc's LDA_X + LDA_C_PW must be the same as Elk's xctype=3.

    [1] link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.45.13244
    [2] https://journals.aps.org/prb/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevB.13.4274
    [3] http://octopus-code.org/wiki/Lda_x

     

    Last edit: Andrew Shyichuk 2017-05-16
  • Lars Nordström

    Lars Nordström - 2017-05-16

    It might be units, Hartree vs Rydbergs ...

     

    Last edit: Lars Nordström 2017-05-16
    • Andrew Shyichuk

      Andrew Shyichuk - 2017-05-16

      Silly me, it is Rydberg in [2] and Hartree allover [1]. Thanks. General question remains, however.

       

Log in to post a comment.