Not sure I understand the problem: if k is a Bloch vector and G a reciprocal-lattice vector, k+G is equivalent to k. This property can be used to reduce the number of inequivalent k-points needed for the sum over the (irreducible) Brillouin Zone

Paolo

On 10/02/2025 14:13, Lukas Cvitkovich wrote:
        
Non ricevi spesso messaggi di posta elettronica da [email protected]. Scopri perché è importante <https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>
        

Dear QE users and developers,

I am currently trying to reproduce the construction of an irreducible k- point set as done by QE. For this, I set "verbosity = high" to get the symmetry operations printed in the output file. I start from a uniform k-point mesh. Then, using the same symmetry operations as QE, I transform every k-point and fold it back in the first Brillouin zone. If the resulting k-point falls on another k-point of the uniform grid, it is NOT irreducible. In this manner, as also described by Blöchl et al (Phys. Rev. B *49*, 16223, 1994) I find the set of irreducible kpoints.

My code agrees with QE for a simple structure (fcc crystal tested and verified) but I have problems with a more complicated case (the 2D magnet FGT). In this example, 6 symmetry operations are found (see attached QE-output file). Starting from a 3x3x3 uniform grid, the irreducible set of kpoints - according to QE - contains 7 points. However, I find 12 irreducible k- points.

First, please note, that every point found by QE is also contained in my set. But I find additional points which (according to QE) should be related by some symmetry operation. By looking at the weights, I could figure out which kpoints should belong together. For instance: According to QE, the kpoints [1/3, 0, 0] and [2/3, 0, 0] are equivalent, as well as [0, 0, 1/3] and [0, 0, 2/3] should be equivalent too. I recognized that all the extra points could be transformed into each other by translating the lattice. However, applying all the symmetry operations from the QE output file (these are exclusively rotations and not translations), I cannot transform these points into each other. You might try for yourself.

So the question that I would like to ask is: Are there any "hidden" symmetry operations which are not explicitly printed in the output file? Could fractional translations be the reason? Is it maybe related to differences between point group and space group? Any other hints to what I am missing?

Thank you! Your help would be highly appreciated!

Best,
Lukas


_______________________________________________________________________________
The Quantum ESPRESSO Foundation stands in solidarity with all civilians 
worldwide who are victims of terrorism, military aggression, and indiscriminate 
warfare.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quantum ESPRESSO is supported by MaX (www.max-centre.eu)
users mailing list [email protected]
https://lists.quantum-espresso.org/mailman/listinfo/users

--
Paolo Giannozzi, Dip. Scienze Matematiche Informatiche e Fisiche,
Univ. Udine, via delle Scienze 206, 33100 Udine Italy, +39-0432-558216

_______________________________________________________________________________
The Quantum ESPRESSO Foundation stands in solidarity with all civilians 
worldwide who are victims of terrorism, military aggression, and indiscriminate 
warfare.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quantum ESPRESSO is supported by MaX (www.max-centre.eu)
users mailing list [email protected]
https://lists.quantum-espresso.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Reply via email to