User Tools

Site Tools


beauty:variables

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
beauty:variables [2018/06/20 21:27] – [General philosophy] Xavier Gonzebeauty:variables [2018/06/20 22:11] (current) – [To be clarified] Xavier Gonze
Line 1: Line 1:
 ====== Summary ====== ====== Summary ======
-This page is destined to be a sandbox for ongoing work to improve the naming and default values for abinit input variables +This page is destined to be a memo, to list ongoing work or propositions to improve the naming and default values for abinit input variables 
-and other variables or other namings in documentations+and other variables or other namings in documentation ...
  
  
Line 13: Line 13:
 ===== Propositions ===== ===== Propositions =====
  
-default for ionmov should now be 22+default for ionmov should now be 22 (XGonze will do it)
  
 default for ntime should be 20 default for ntime should be 20
Line 38: Line 38:
  
 introduce new input variable "expertise", to trigger default values for the "chk" variables ... introduce new input variable "expertise", to trigger default values for the "chk" variables ...
 +
 +==== To be clarified ===
 +
 +(From ALherbier 20180614 - observed during the beautification ...)
 +
 +cpuh, cpum, cpus => should'nt we use INPUT_ONLY and NO_MULTI both for all three variables?
 +
 +diecut/diegap => should we incorporate only relevant if iprcel >=21 as in dielam?
 +
 +kptbounds => personal remark : a big part of the description should be moved in another place of the website (kind of tutorial somehow).
 +
 +occ => not sure if the dimension given in the description is correct (as it does not seem to correspond to the text).
 +
 +postoldff => should we give the units (I suppose in hartree/Bohr) in the text description?
 +
 +Should we remove the "specified" word in the following case ? *The use of this variable forbids the use of: specified(ngqpt) 
 +
 +ratsph => the description text contains this "(in version 4.2, this procedure is NOT implemented, unfortunately)". Should it be removed?
 +
 +scphon_supercell => "TO BE IMPROVED: should contain a tutorial on how to do self-consistent phonon calculations, David Waroquiers 090831" What should I do with this sentence ?
 +
 +slabzbeg/slabzend => should be a scalar according to what I understood but the default value is an array =[0.0, 0.0] ?
 +
 +so_psp => Is usepaw==0 still a condition? Or can we now use spin-orbit with paw in recent Abinit version?
 +
 +spinat => In the description text, I found "In case of non-collinear magnetism (nsppol=1, nspinor=1, nspden=4)". Shouldn't it be nspinor=2?
 +
 +symafm => In the description text, I found "non-collinear magnetism ([[nsppol]]=1, [[nspinor]]=1, [[nspden]]=4)". Shouldn't it be nspinor=2?
 +
 +timopt => "If 4  -->  close to [[timopt]]=1, except that the different parts of the lobpcg routine are timed in detail. A different splitting of lobpcg than for [[timopt]]=-3 is provided." Should'nt it be [[timopt]]=3 at the end of this sentence ?
 +
 +tl_nprccg => "TO BE IMPROVED: all tl_* and wvl_* variables should contain a link to a tutorial, David Waroquiers 090831." What should I do with this sentence?
 +
 +wvl_hgrid => Not in the list of gstate ! should'nt it be the case ? (as for other wvl_* variables)
  
  
  
  
beauty/variables.1529522846.txt.gz · Last modified: 2018/06/20 21:27 by Xavier Gonze