[Wien] WARNING with eece (EF not accurate)

Dear WIEN2k users In my [runsp_lapw -so -eece] run, [x lapw2 -eece] shows a strange work. x lapw0 -p x lapw1 -up -p x lapw1 -dn -p x lapwso -up -orb -p x lapw2 -up -p -c -so x lapw2 -dn -p -c -so x lcore -up x lcore -dn x lapwdm -up -p -so -c x lapw2 -c -up -so -p -eece x lapw2 -c -dn -so -p -eec

Re: [Wien] WARNING with eece (EF not accurate)

Compare your case.in2 and in2eece files. How do they differ ?? It might be the EMIN in your case.ineece is too low and you are cutting states ??? On 09/29/2016 12:32 PM, Kyohn Ahn wrote: Dear WIEN2k users In my [runsp_lapw -so -eece] run, [x lapw2 -eece] shows a strange work. x lapw0 -p x l

Re: [Wien] WARNING with eece (EF not accurate)

Dear prof. Peter Blaha Thank you very much for your quick response.! I checked the inputs: ### case.in2c ### TOT (TOT,FOR,QTL,EFG,FERMI) -12.80 115.00 0.50 0.05 1 EMIN, NE, ESEPERMIN, ESEPER0, iqtls TETRA0.000 (GAUSS,ROOT,TEMP,TETRA,ALL eval) 0 0 2 0 -3 2

[Wien] Question about mBJ+eece

Dear WIEN2k users Can mBJ+eece show a reasonable result? i.e., Is there any possibility of overestimation on the strong correlation effects? Recently, I god some results of mBJ+SO & GGA+SO+eece & mBJ+SO+eece , but only mBJ+SO+eece showed an expected result. Thank you in advance for any helpful a