%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Error in routine mix_rho (1):
negative dr2
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
I have traced this to the ns_ddot function in PW/src/scf_mod.f90, which calculates a contribution to dr2 from the Hubbard term. Due to the negative U, this value also becomes negative. Consequently, the error can be avoided by changing Hubbard_U(nt) to ABS(Hubbard_U(nt)) in this function (in two places).
My question is this:
- Does this change make sense, or is the sign of ns_ddot relevant?
- Does it make sense physically to use negative U? These are empirical values, to match a known band structure.
Thank you and best regards,
Dominik Gresch
_______________________________________________ Quantum ESPRESSO is supported by MaX (www.max-centre.eu/quantum-espresso) users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.quantum-espresso.org/mailman/listinfo/users
