On 15/07/2013 11:20, Paolo Giannozzi wrote: > On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 17:45 +0900, H. Lee wrote: > >> BTW, why don't you recommend the UPF v.1 format in constructing >> pseudopotentials? Is there any specific reason? > because there is a new format (not much better than the previous > one, though). If we keep generating pseudopotentials in old > format, the old format will be around forever > > P. > Dear PWSCF users,
I would like to write that I generated pseudopotentials in UPFv1 format using the atomic software. Is there a reference to cite for the atomic code and for UPF format? Right now, it looks like this: "these pseudopotentials were generated using the atomic software (ref?) in the 'Unified Pseudopotential Format' (UPF) (ref?). " Do you have any idea how to do that? Thanks in advance for your help! Merlin M?heut PS: I have used UPF v1 pseudopotentials for their ability to be read by both CPMD and quantum espresso codes. Unfortunately, UPF v2 do not seem readable by CPMD, to my knowledge. -- Merlin M?heut, G?osciences et Environnement Toulouse, OMP, 14 avenue Edouard Belin, 31400 Toulouse, France phone +33 (0)5 61 33 26 17, fax +33 (0)5 61 33 25 60
