Dear Paolo,

Probably you meant to refer to another mail thread. Probably the one started by 
Abdul Shaik.
http://lists.quantum-espresso.org/pipermail/users/2019-February/042084.html
The one you are actually referring to, is the one we are in right now.

But can you explicitly make clear why it is not a good idea to have symmetry in 
a NEB calculation?
I’m not convinced right now.

The model I choose has S2 symmetry and only prevents phenomena to occur, which 
might break this symmetry.
I don’t expect any problem with that.

Moreover, I don’t think it is on purpose that neb.x cannot detect the symmetry. 
As the mail thread, started by Abdul Shaik, showed that it was even possible to 
change the number of k-points for one of the images during the NEB calculation. 
So neb.x is able to detect symmetry. Only in my particular case, it is not able 
to and I wonder why.



Met vriendelijke groeten,
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
With kind regards,


Willem Offermans
Researcher Electrocatalysis SCT
VITO NV | Boeretang 200 | 2400 Mol
Phone:+32(0)14335263 Mobile:+32(0)492182073

[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

[cid:[email protected]]

On 14 Feb 2019, at 07:55, Paolo Giannozzi 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 10:07 PM Paolo Giannozzi 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

You can start a calculation from the files pw_1.in<http://pw_1.in/>, 
pw_2.in<http://pw_2.in/>, etc., that the NEB code creates in the current 
execution directory. They contain input data for the starting points on the NEB 
chain. I did that and got no symmetry, by the way.

and,  by the way, this recent thread explains why it is not a good thing to 
have symmetry in NEB images:
   http://lists.quantum-espresso.org/pipermail/users/2019-February/042111.html

Paolo


$ pw.x -in pd.xml

     Program PWSCF v.6.3 starts on 13Feb2019 at 11:49:38

     This program is part of the open-source Quantum ESPRESSO suite
     for quantum simulation of materials; please cite
         "P. Giannozzi et al., J. Phys.:Condens. Matter 21 395502 (2009);
         "P. Giannozzi et al., J. Phys.:Condens. Matter 29 465901 (2017);
          URL 
http://www.quantum-espresso.org<http://www.quantum-espresso.org/>",
     in publications or presentations arising from this work. More details at
     http://www.quantum-espresso.org/quote

     Parallel version (MPI & OpenMP), running on      20 processor cores
     Number of MPI processes:                 1
     Threads/MPI process:                    20

     MPI processes distributed on     1 nodes
     Reading xml input from pd.xml

 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
     Error in routine read_input (1):
     xml input disabled
 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

     stopping ...
application called MPI_Abort(MPI_COMM_WORLD, 1) - process 0
[unset]: write_line error; fd=-1 buf=:cmd=abort exitcode=1
:
system msg for write_line failure : Bad file descriptor

So I cannot easily play with the settings.


Met vriendelijke groeten,
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
With kind regards,


Willem Offermans
Researcher Electrocatalysis SCT
VITO NV | Boeretang 200 | 2400 Mol
Phone:+32(0)14335263 Mobile:+32(0)492182073

[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

<vito.jpg>

On 13 Feb 2019, at 11:24, Offermans Willem 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Dear Stefano,


No, point symmetry doesn’t depend on units, i.e. squeezing or expanding the 
system equally in all directions doesn’t change symmetry. I agree!

The presence of the inversion symmetry is not to save computational time, but 
to correct for possible dipole interactions.

Anyway, the point is that neb.x is not able to detect and to use the symmetry 
of the involved images. This is weird, since the task of optimising/calculating 
the images
will be delegated to pw.x, I suppose. And I showed that pw.x detects and uses 
the symmetry. Maybe the keyword ``use_all_frac     = .true.`` is not considered 
for a NEB calculation.



Met vriendelijke groeten,
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
With kind regards,


Willem Offermans
Researcher Electrocatalysis SCT
VITO NV | Boeretang 200 | 2400 Mol
Phone:+32(0)14335263 Mobile:+32(0)492182073

[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

<vito.jpg>

On 13 Feb 2019, at 10:04, Stefano Baroni 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:



On 13 Feb 2019, at 09:50, Offermans Willem 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Dear Quantum Espresso friends,

Dear Wilem:

I made a mistake in my previous e-mail.
The atom coordinates are not in Angstrom but in Bohr.

I have corrected this in my calculations, but still no symmetry found.

I would be surprised if you found the contrary. I cannot imagine that the point 
symmetry of any system could depend on units: do you?

$ grep "ymmetr" pd_?/PW.out
pd_1/PW.out:     No symmetry found
pd_2/PW.out:     No symmetry found
pd_3/PW.out:     No symmetry found
pd_4/PW.out:     No symmetry found
pd_5/PW.out:     No symmetry found
pd_6/PW.out:     No symmetry found
pd_7/PW.out:     No symmetry found

So the question remains. What is the reason that the symmetry cannot be 
detected?

As an extra check I have made a scf calculation on the last image.

$ grep "Sym. Ops." pd.out
      2 Sym. Ops., with inversion, found ( 1 have fractional translation)

So pw.x can find the symmetry whereas neb.x cannot!

Just guessing: maybe for some reasons neb restricts its search to pure 
rotations (no fractional translations involved). Also, I have the impression 
that inversion symmetry does not help save any computer time, because in 
practice it has the same effects as time-reversal symmetry, which always holds.

Just my worthless 5 cents …
SB


—
Stefano Baroni - Trieste —  http://stefano.baroni.me<http://stefano.baroni.me/>




_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.quantum-espresso.org/mailman/listinfo/users


Indien u VITO Mol bezoekt, hou aub er dan rekening mee dat de hoofdingang 
voortaan enkel bereikbaar is vanuit de richting Dessel-Retie, niet vanuit 
richting Mol, zie vito.be/route.<http://www.vito.be/route>
If you plan to visit VITO at Mol, then please note that the main entrance can 
only be reached coming from Dessel-Retie and no longer coming from Mol, see 
vito.be/en/contact/locations.<http://www.vito.be/en/contact/locations>
VITO Disclaimer: http://www.vito.be/e-maildisclaimer
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.quantum-espresso.org/mailman/listinfo/users


--
Paolo Giannozzi, Dip. Scienze Matematiche Informatiche e Fisiche,
Univ. Udine, via delle Scienze 208, 33100 Udine, Italy
Phone +39-0432-558216, fax +39-0432-558222



--
Paolo Giannozzi, Dip. Scienze Matematiche Informatiche e Fisiche,
Univ. Udine, via delle Scienze 208, 33100 Udine, Italy
Phone +39-0432-558216, fax +39-0432-558222

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.quantum-espresso.org/mailman/listinfo/users

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.quantum-espresso.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Reply via email to