GW method for metal

Queries about input and output files, running specific calculations, etc.


Moderators: Global Moderator, Moderator

Post Reply
Message
Author
Divyapratheesh
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat May 24, 2025 7:22 am

GW method for metal

#1 Post by Divyapratheesh » Mon May 26, 2025 6:57 am

I was doing GW method for a metal by following the procedure on the VASP Wiki ( using vasp 5.4.4). LOPTICS is given as false in the second step and WAVEDER file is not generated. Then I copied the WAVECAR and done the second step. LORBIT=11 is included in the INCAR as I am interested in the magnetic moment of the material. But I am getting following error in the output:
"= BAD TERMINATION OF ONE OF YOUR APPLICATION PROCESSES
= RANK 12 PID 27244 RUNNING AT compute11
= KILLED BY SIGNAL: 9 (Killed) "
Could you please explain the tags that are to be included in GW method for a metal? Also, is it necessary to set NELM= 1 in the INCAR for both the steps?


henrique_miranda
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 555
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2019 12:41 pm
Contact:

Re: GW method for metal

#2 Post by henrique_miranda » Mon May 26, 2025 10:01 am

Could you share all the relevant input files for the different steps in your calculation?
It would also be useful if you share a bash script with the sequence of commands that lead to this issue.


Divyapratheesh
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat May 24, 2025 7:22 am

Re: GW method for metal

#3 Post by Divyapratheesh » Mon May 26, 2025 11:48 am

Sure sir. These are my input files for step 1

1.rar

.
INCAR file for the second step is also attached. Other input files are same as that of first step

INCAR.rar

.
Thank you

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

henrique_miranda
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 555
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2019 12:41 pm
Contact:

Re: GW method for metal

#4 Post by henrique_miranda » Tue May 27, 2025 2:48 pm

Ok, can it be that you are simply running out of memory?
Can you try running the same calculation with a smaller number of bands (NBANDS=48) and KPOINTS (2 2 2) I would say.
Note that with these parameters the calculation will not be converged at all, my suggestion is just to help in figuring out what the problem is.


Divyapratheesh
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat May 24, 2025 7:22 am

Re: GW method for metal

#5 Post by Divyapratheesh » Thu May 29, 2025 9:06 am

Ok. I will try.


Divyapratheesh
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat May 24, 2025 7:22 am

Re: GW method for metal

#6 Post by Divyapratheesh » Fri May 30, 2025 5:33 am

Now i got the output without showing error. W0001.tmp, WFULL0001.tmp ... these files are generated.


henrique_miranda
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 555
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2019 12:41 pm
Contact:

Re: GW method for metal

#7 Post by henrique_miranda » Fri May 30, 2025 7:09 am

This likely means that you were running out of memory in your calculation.
You can gradually increase the k-point sampling and bands and see how far you can realistically go.


Divyapratheesh
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat May 24, 2025 7:22 am

Re: GW method for metal

#8 Post by Divyapratheesh » Fri May 30, 2025 7:36 am

Then, how can I understand that whether my outputs are correct or not? If I am not using enough number of kpoints and band, the results will be wrong right?
Also, for different values of NELM in the INCAR, I am getting different values of magnetic moment in the OUTCAR. Then, which value do I need to consider? (From different tutorials, it is seen that NELM can be taken as 1,2,3 or4)


henrique_miranda
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 555
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2019 12:41 pm
Contact:

Re: GW method for metal

#9 Post by henrique_miranda » Fri May 30, 2025 7:59 am

You need to monitor the convergence of the final quantity you are interested in as a function of k-points and number of bands.
To get the initial KS states you should first run a standard SCF calculation without a very high number of bands just to get the correct charge density. Then on a second step you start from the previous charge density or WAVECAR and specify ALGO=Exact and increase the number of bands. In that case NELM=1 should be sufficient because your charge density has already been converged in the first step.


Post Reply