Hi, these are papers on mBJ+U: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4798706 http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4828864
Very often, the procedure is to adjust U until the desired results are obtained. F. Tran On Fri, 1 May 2015, delamora wrote:
Sorry for this question, it has been answered before; --------- (2/22/2012) So most likely mBJ + U gives the better solution, but probably the U should be smaller than in LDA+U, because mBJ already shifts the f-states a bit. -------- but I am still confused, in GW and DMFT calculations the Hubbard U is still a parameter, so; Does the mBJ needs a not precisely known parameter? Saludos Pablo ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Dear P Blaha and F Tran, I would like to ask if with the modified Becke Johnson potential one should use the Hubbard U? Saludos Pablo
_______________________________________________ Wien mailing list Wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien SEARCH the MAILING-LIST at: http://www.mail-archive.com/wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/index.html
