-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 79
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
How to shift density of states #190
Comments
This is the correct behaviour if the DOS includes broadening. Do you see it with a tetrahedron-method DOS? |
I used the below INCARs
|
That does look like a tetrahedron-method DOS, so this isn't due to smearing. The Fermi energy of a non-self-consistent band structure calculation isn't really meaningful, but the energy levels should be consistent with a DOS calculated on the same density. I wonder if it was shifted by self-consistency with more k-points. I see HSE mentioned so presumably these are self-consistent hybrid-DFT calculations with zero-weighted k-points for the band structure. Did you also zero-weight the DOS k-points? (Actually I'm not sure if Sumo really supports that, any idea @utf?) How well-converged is the self-consistent k-point mesh? Another thing to check: which k-point has the VBM in the DOS? (You should be able to check with |
I used SCF k-mesh with 0.022piAng^(-1) for SCF in both cases. Although, "zero-weighted k-points" were used for SCF and NSCF for band structure calculations while for DOS, a regular k-mesh was used. Hole effective masses: Electron effective masses: For DOS, I used gamma-centered k-mesh for band structure, I used additional zero-weighted k-points. I am attaching the plot. |
Hmm, that certainly does look like a shift in the energy reference. Can you have a look at the reported Fermi energy of your band structure and DOS calculations and see if they differ by a similar amount? I think bandplot relies on the energy levels being consistent between calculations. It's strange that they would be so different for such a flat band structure. |
I have checked the Fermi energy in both the cases, band &dos, and they
differ by a small amount. I wanted to shift the doss by this difference
from terminal.
…On Mon, Dec 5, 2022, 8:13 PM Adam J. Jackson ***@***.***> wrote:
Hmm, that certainly does look like a shift in the energy reference. Can
you have a look at the reported Fermi energy of your band structure and DOS
calculations and see if they differ by a similar amount?
I think bandplot relies on the energy levels being consistent between
calculations. It's strange that they would be so different for such a flat
band structure.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#190 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADZPLTYVP4NL53KGTT6QILLWLXE6BANCNFSM6AAAAAASOAJPLQ>
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
We do not currently provide a command-line argument to apply this shift, it is expected that the DOS and band-structure calculations will be consistent. It is quite strange that the Fermi energies would be different from calculations with the same "active" k-points, are you sure they are both using the same Gamma-centered 4x4x1 mesh and the SCF is converged? |
This seems to be a bug that the command sumo-bandplot can not set the fermi energy to the same point that the band is set. |
No, it is a feature request |
Dear Alex,
I am plotting bands and dos in one plot. I see, my DOS is slightly shifted towards the +ve y-axis. I mean, VBM and VBM for bands and DOSs are not falling on the same point. I want to shift the default DOSs with the difference in Fermi_energy of band and doss. How can I do it?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: