ws cutoff CUTwsGvec

Deals with issues related to computation of optical spectra, solving the Bethe-Salpeter equation.

Moderators: Davide Sangalli, andrea.ferretti, myrta gruning, andrea marini, Daniele Varsano

Post Reply
sunxl
Posts: 59
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2024 8:05 am
Location: China

ws cutoff CUTwsGvec

Post by sunxl » Mon Apr 13, 2026 2:49 pm

Dear all,

I am studying a one-dimensional system placed in an orthorhombic cell, where the periodic direction is along z, and 20 Å of vacuum is added in the non-periodic directions. When applying the Coulomb cutoff, I use the ws Z scheme.

1、In Yambo, when using the ws Z cutoff, the parameter CUTwsGvec has a default value of 0.7 Ry. I want to examine whether different values of CUTwsGvec affect the results. Therefore, I set it to 0.7 Ry and 1.0 Ry, respectively. The resulting G₀W₀ calculations are identical, but the G₀W₀-BSE results show significant differences, leading to completely different exciton distributions. Should I gradually increase CUTwsGvec to achieve convergence? What criteria should be used to determine convergence?

2、I would like to perform GW corrections on top of a PBE0 calculation. Is the parameter CUTwsGvec equivalent to ecutvcut in QE, and should they be kept consistent during calculations?

Best,
sunxi
Dr. sunxl
Beijing Computing Science Research Center, China.

User avatar
Daniele Varsano
Posts: 4334
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 2:23 pm
Contact:

Re: ws cutoff CUTwsGvec

Post by Daniele Varsano » Wed Apr 15, 2026 7:27 am

Dear Sunxi,
CUTwsGvec indicates the number of G components of truncated potential are considered: yes it is a convergence parameter that should converge quite fast. CUTwsGvec (Yambo) is exactly the same of ecutvcut (QE). For consistency in a GW calculation it is safe to keep them consistent. For the BSE you can also use a different vlaue.

Best,

Daniele
Dr. Daniele Varsano
S3-CNR Institute of Nanoscience and MaX Center, Italy
MaX - Materials design at the Exascale
http://www.nano.cnr.it
http://www.max-centre.eu/

Post Reply