Do you get identical gaps for:

LDA and then MBJ  (no SO)

PBE and then MBJ  (no SO)   ???

If you did everything right, there is no reason why adding SO at the end should give a different result.

Probably some other mistake ... ?


Am 11.05.2024 um 17:32 schrieb Yakup Boran:
Dear Dr Blaha,

I think I did not write clear enough.

The calculation was done by following:

1. I did regular scf calculation with LDA
2. I added mBJ on it.
3. Then I added SOC.

I repeated the same calculation with PBE.


Thank you

11 May 2024 Cmt, saat 17:08 tarihinde Peter Blaha <peter.bl...@tuwien.ac.at> şunu yazdı:

    No.

    These 2 calculations should be exactly the same.

    What matters is only:    XC_MBJ

    Everything in parenthesis is only a comment to give you a few
    common options.


    Am 11.05.2024 um 16:00 schrieb Yakup Boran:
    Dear Dr Blaha,

    Thank you for your response.

    ———————————
    case.in0 for LDA is

    TOT XC_MBJ ( (XC_PBE,XC_PBESOL,XC_WC,XC_MBJ,XC_SCAN)

     R2V IFFT (R2V)

     30 30 48 2.00 1 NCON 9 # min IFFT-parameters, enhancement
    factor, iprint, NCON n

    ——————————-
    Case.in0 for PBE

    TOT XC_MBJ ( (XC_LDA,XC_PBESOL,XC_WC,XC_MBJ,XC_SCAN)
    R2V IFFT (R2V)

    30 30 48 2.00 1 NCON 9 # min IFFT-parameters, enhancement factor,
    iprint, NCON n

    ———————-

    Best regards

    11 May 2024 Cmt, saat 16:03 tarihinde Peter Blaha
    <peter.bl...@tuwien.ac.at> şunu yazdı:

        I'm not quite sure I understand what you did.

        You are always using   mBJ  (for VX), but how do you mix in
        LDA or PBE ?

        By default we use LDA for VC, (and anything for EX and EC,
        since this is
        not important).

        Usually, the choice of VC has only a small effect (as
        compared to VX).

        Please show the 2 lines in case.in0


        Am 10.05.2024 um 15:56 schrieb Yakup Boran:
        > Dear Wien2K users,
        > I am running a calculation for a Bi-containing compound with a
        > tetragonal structure type. I used LDA with mBJ, and then,
        due to the
        > heavy Bi atom, I did the SOC calculation. The calculated
        band gap
        > energy with SOC is smaller than without SOC. I checked the
        literature,
        > and the band gap decrease is common for SOC calculation.
        However, if I
        > use PBE-GGA with mBJ (instead of LDA with mBJ), the band
        gap energy
        > with SOC is greater than without SOC, which is contrary to the
        > literature.
        >
        >  Is it possible that I get a band gap decrease with LDA
        while I get a
        > band gap increase with PBE-GGA when the SOC effect is taken
        into
        > consideration?
        >
        > Any response will be appreciated. 
        >
        > Best Regards
        >
        > Yakup Bran
        >
        > _______________________________________________
        > Wien mailing list
        > Wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
        > http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
        > SEARCH the MAILING-LIST at:
        http://www.mail-archive.com/wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/index.html

-- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
        Peter Blaha,  Inst. f. Materials Chemistry, TU Vienna, A-1060
        Vienna
        Phone: +43-158801165300
        Email: peter.bl...@tuwien.ac.at
        WWW: http://www.imc.tuwien.ac.at     WIEN2k: http://www.wien2k.at
        
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

        _______________________________________________
        Wien mailing list
        Wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
        http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
        SEARCH the MAILING-LIST at:
        http://www.mail-archive.com/wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/index.html


    _______________________________________________
    Wien mailing list
    Wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
    http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
    SEARCH the MAILING-LIST 
at:http://www.mail-archive.com/wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/index.html

-- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Peter Blaha,  Inst. f. Materials Chemistry, TU Vienna, A-1060 Vienna
    Phone: +43-158801165300
Email:peter.bl...@tuwien.ac.at WWW:http://www.imc.tuwien.ac.at WIEN2k:http://www.wien2k.at
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    _______________________________________________
    Wien mailing list
    Wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
    http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
    SEARCH the MAILING-LIST at:
    http://www.mail-archive.com/wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/index.html


_______________________________________________
Wien mailing list
Wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
SEARCH the MAILING-LIST 
at:http://www.mail-archive.com/wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/index.html

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Blaha,  Inst. f. Materials Chemistry, TU Vienna, A-1060 Vienna
Phone: +43-158801165300
Email:peter.bl...@tuwien.ac.at WWW:http://www.imc.tuwien.ac.at WIEN2k:http://www.wien2k.at
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Wien mailing list
Wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
SEARCH the MAILING-LIST at:  
http://www.mail-archive.com/wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/index.html

Reply via email to