[CPMD-list] Platform-dependent wave function optimization results
Vladimir Stegailov
stegailov at ihed.ras.ru
Thu Apr 26 19:52:59 CEST 2007
Dear colleagues,
is it normal to get essentially different WFO processes on different platforms using the same input script?
I use the 3.11 version and compare two platforms:
1. cpmd compiled with IFC v. 8.0 and libatlas_p4.a
2. cpmd compiled with IFC v. 9.0 and MKL 8.0.1
The input script is given below.
In the 1st case the WFO process initially gives several "FRIESNER_C| EIGENVECTOR 4 IS VERY BAD!" warnings, but eventually goes well and stops at NFI=179.
In the 2nd case there are no warnings and WFO stops much quicker at NFI=44.
Is the reason just the difference in FFT libraries? Could it be specific to the FEMD simulations?
I would appreciate any comments!
Vladimir
&CPMD
FILEPATH
/home/stegailov/testing/cpmd/md3/
OPTIMIZE WAVEFUNCTION
UNIT HESSIAN
BFGS
FREE ENERGY FUNCTIONAL
LANCZOS DIAGONALISATION
LANCZOS PARAMETERS
1 6 10 1.D-18
TROTTER FACTOR
0.001
BOGOLIUBOV CORRECTION OFF
GRAM-SCHMIDT ORTHOGONALISATION
CONVERGENCE
1.D-6 5.D-6
MAXSTEP
5000
BROYDEN MIXING
0.15 200 0.01 0 8
ALEXANDER MIXING
1.1
TEMPERATURE
400.
ELECTRON TEMPERATURE
10000.
COMPRESS WRITE32
STRUCTURE BONDS
ENERGYBANDS
ELECTROSTATIC POTENTIAL
RHOOUT
&END
&SYSTEM
POINT GROUP
AUTO
SYMMETRY
1
CELL
8.064 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 (8.064=2*4.032, 4.032A is the eq lattice const of Al)
CUTOFF
15.000
ANGSTROMS
STATES
250
SCALE
TESR
1
KPOINTS MONKHORST-PACK FULL
2 2 2
&END
&ATOMS
*AL_SGS KLEINMAN-BYLANDER
LMAX=D
32
0.0178998 -0.0197471 0.0145112
...
0.500011 0.750491 0.756745
VELOCITIES
32 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
-5.10982 0.101812 -1.43574
...
7.04835 2.96887 2.84766
END VELOCITIES
&END
&BASIS
PSEUDO AO 2
0 1
&END
&DFT
NEWCODE
&END
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://cpmd.org/pipermail/cpmd-list/attachments/20070426/103303a3/attachment.html
More information about the CPMD-list
mailing list