CP2K Open Source Molecular Dynamics

User Tools

Site Tools

Trace:
exercises:2017_uzh_cp2k-tutorial:gapw

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
Next revisionBoth sides next revision
exercises:2017_uzh_cp2k-tutorial:gapw [2017/07/12 00:21] – [2. Task: compute the XAS spectrum of ice-1h] gtocciexercises:2017_uzh_cp2k-tutorial:gapw [2017/07/12 20:24] – gtocci
Line 119: Line 119:
       QUADRATURE   GC_LOG       QUADRATURE   GC_LOG
       ! parameters needed for the GAPW method, look at the manual for more details       ! parameters needed for the GAPW method, look at the manual for more details
-      EPSFIT       1.E-4+      EPSFIT       1.E-4 ! precision to give the extension of a hard gaussian
       EPSISO       1.0E-12       EPSISO       1.0E-12
       EPSRHO0      1.E-8       EPSRHO0      1.E-8
       LMAXN0       4       LMAXN0       4
       LMAXN1       6       LMAXN1       6
-      ALPHA0_H     10+      ALPHA0_H     10 ! Exponent for hard compensation charge
     &END QS     &END QS
     &SCF     &SCF
Line 289: Line 289:
 previously published calculations and NEXAFS experiments for ice 1h: previously published calculations and NEXAFS experiments for ice 1h:
 <code> <code>
-../../LIB_TOOLS/get_average_spectrum.sh+../LIB_TOOLS/get_average_spectrum.sh
 </code> </code>
  
Line 300: Line 300:
  
 How do your results for the convoluted spectrum compare with previous experiments and simulations? How do your results for the convoluted spectrum compare with previous experiments and simulations?
-Look for instance at the Bottom of Fig.2 of the papers [[doi>http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.2928842]] +Look for instance at the bottom of Fig.2 of the papers [[doi> 10.1063/1.2928842]] 
-or Fig 2 of [[doi>http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.1879752]].+or Fig 2 of [[doi> 10.1063/1.1879752]].
 There should be several things that do not match with our calculations. There should be several things that do not match with our calculations.
 Apart from a shift towards larger binding energies compared with the two papers, Apart from a shift towards larger binding energies compared with the two papers,
Line 325: Line 325:
 </code> </code>
  
-  * Compare the spectra between each other and with the paper [[doi>http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.2928842]] where the spectra for both ice 1h and single water snapshots have been calculated.+  * Compare the spectra between each other and with the paper [[doi>10.1063/1.2928842]] where the spectra for both ice 1h and single water snapshots have been calculated.
   * Fig.5 of this review [[doi>10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00672]] also shows a comparison between recent ice and liquid water spectra. Can you clearly identify the  pre-, main- and post-edge features in the bulk water spectra and in ice?   * Fig.5 of this review [[doi>10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00672]] also shows a comparison between recent ice and liquid water spectra. Can you clearly identify the  pre-, main- and post-edge features in the bulk water spectra and in ice?
   * What is the main reason for the different shapes between water and ice?   * What is the main reason for the different shapes between water and ice?
exercises/2017_uzh_cp2k-tutorial/gapw.txt · Last modified: 2020/08/21 10:15 by 127.0.0.1