Some Questions

Concerns issues with computing quasiparticle corrections to the DFT eigenvalues - i.e., the self-energy within the GW approximation (-g n), or considering the Hartree-Fock exchange only (-x)

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

Post Reply
WEI Wei
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2011 11:04 am

Some Questions

Post by WEI Wei » Thu Dec 15, 2011 10:49 am

Dear all,

I have some questions:

1) In a "yambo -g n -p p" calculation, the "NGsBlkXp" is set at 400. However, it prints "NGsBlkXp= 403" in the report file "r_HF_and_locXC_em1d_ppa_gw0". What is the reason?

2) Also in a "yambo -g n -p p" calculation, the coordinate of k-point is given as
*X* K [1] : 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 (iku) * Comp.s 9695 * weight 0.0069
*X* K [2] : 0.08333 0.166667 0.000000 (iku) * Comp.s 9743 * weight 0.02778
*X* K [3] : 0.166667 0.333333 0.000000 (iku) * Comp.s 9733 * weight 0.02778
... ...
but on the DFT level (PWscf), it gives as:
k( 1) = ( 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000000), wk = 0.0138889
k( 2) = ( 0.0096811 0.0167681 0.0000000), wk = 0.0555556
k( 3) = ( 0.0193621 0.0335362 0.0000000), wk = 0.0555556
I want to know how to transform the coordinate from one to the other one? I mean I want to plot a quasiparticle band structure as that in attachment.

3) From the resulting file of a "yambo -o c" calculation, it shows:
E/ev[1] eps /Im[2] eps /Re[3] eps0/Im[4] eps0/Re[5]
#
0.00000 0.00350 2.36745 0.00505 2.58112
0.02002 0.00351 2.36746 0.00505 2.58114
0.04004 0.00351 2.36750 0.00505 2.58120
0.06006 0.00351 2.36756 0.00506 2.58130
0.08008 0.00351 2.36765 0.00506 2.58144
0.10010 0.00352 2.36776 0.00506 2.58161
... ...
What is the difference between "eps/Im[2]" and "eps0/Im[4]"?

4) In a BSE "yambo -b -o b -y h" calculation WITHOUT QP correction, it gives:
E/ev[1] eps /Im[2] eps /Re[3] eps0/Im[4] eps0/Re[5] eps`/Im[6] eps`/Re[7]
#
0.0000 0.0056 1.3383 0.0042 1.2942 0.0056 1.3383
0.0200 0.0057 1.3395 0.0043 1.2950 0.0057 1.3395
0.0400 0.0057 1.3406 0.0043 1.2959 0.0057 1.3406
0.0601 0.0058 1.3417 0.0043 1.2967 0.0058 1.3417
... ...
The fourth volume of "eps0/Im[4]" means independent-particel result, i.e., LDA-RPA, and if QP correction is taken into account, this volume gives GW-RPA result. Am I right? It seems that QP correction must be considered when solve the BSE calculation.

5) When do a "yambo -b -o b -y h" calculation WITH QP correction (GW-BSE) and a "yambo -o c" also WITH QP correction (GW-RPA), what is difference between "eps0/Im[4]" from GW-BSE and "eps/Im[2]" form GW-RPA?

6) In the o.qp file, the Fermi energy is set at zero. Right?

Many many thanks in advance!!!
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
WEI Wei
Postdoctor
Institute of Electrochemistry
Ulm University
Germany
E-mail: dftwei@163.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

User avatar
Daniele Varsano
Posts: 3816
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 2:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Some Questions

Post by Daniele Varsano » Thu Dec 15, 2011 12:32 pm

Dear Wei Wei,
1) You need to fill the shell of G-vectors, so Yambo gives you the nearest number of the G-vectors you indicate in input that has closed shells.
2) You can switch from iku (integer reduced lattice units) coordinate to other units once you know the lattice constant, you can aslo use ypp:
please have a look here
3)
What is the difference between "eps/Im[2]" and "eps0/Im[4]"?
The first one has local field effects included \eps_M=1/eps^-1_00, eps0 is the non-interacting epsilon (Fermi Golden Rule) eps_00.
4) Yes, right if for RPA you mean independent-particle. Of course QP corrections have to be included in BSE calculation, otherwise the theory
it is not consistent.
5) The local field effects as stated above in point 3.
6) Yes

Cheers,

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/

WEI Wei
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2011 11:04 am

Re: Some Questions

Post by WEI Wei » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:37 pm

Dear Daniele,

Thank you very much for your reply!
I know more and more.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
WEI Wei
Postdoctor
Institute of Electrochemistry
Ulm University
Germany
E-mail: dftwei@163.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Post Reply