Reproducibility in density functional theory calculations of solids

Kurt Lejaeghere(Ghent University), Gustav Bihlmayer(Jülich Aachen Research Alliance), Torbjörn Björkman(Åbo Akademi University), Peter Blaha(TU Wien), Stefan Blügel(Jülich Aachen Research Alliance), Volker Blüm(Duke University), Damien Caliste(Commissariat à l'Énergie Atomique et aux Énergies Alternatives), Ivano E. Castelli(École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne), Stewart J. Clark(Durham University), Andrea Dal Corso(Istituto Officina dei Materiali), Stefano de Gironcoli(Istituto Officina dei Materiali), Thierry Deutsch(Commissariat à l'Énergie Atomique et aux Énergies Alternatives), J. K. Dewhurst(Max Planck Institute of Microstructure Physics), Igor Di Marco(Uppsala University), Claudia Draxl(Fritz Haber Institute of the Max Planck Society), Marcin Dułak(Technical University of Denmark), Olle Eriksson(Uppsala University), José A. Flores‐Livas(Max Planck Institute of Microstructure Physics), Kevin F. Garrity(National Institute of Standards and Technology), Luigi Genovese(Commissariat à l'Énergie Atomique et aux Énergies Alternatives), Paolo Giannozzi(University of Udine), Matteo Giantomassi(UCLouvain), Stefan Goedecker(University of Basel), Xavier Gonze(UCLouvain), Oscar Grånäs(Uppsala University), E. K. U. Gross(Max Planck Institute of Microstructure Physics), Andris Guļāns(Fritz Haber Institute of the Max Planck Society), François Gygi(University of California, Davis), D. R. Hamann(Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey), P. J. Hasnip(University of York), N. A. W. Holzwarth(Wake Forest University), Diana Iuşan(Uppsala University), Dominik B. Jochym(Rutherford Appleton Laboratory), F. Jollet(Commissariat à l'Énergie Atomique et aux Énergies Alternatives), Daniel R. Jones(University of Oxford), Georg Kresse(University of Vienna), Klaus Koepernik(Leibniz Institute for Solid State and Materials Research), Emine Küçükbenli(Istituto Officina dei Materiali), Y. O. Kvashnin(Uppsala University), Inka L. M. Locht(Uppsala University), S. Lübeck(Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin), Martijn Marsman(University of Vienna), Nicola Marzari(École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne), Ulrike Nitzsche(Leibniz Institute for Solid State and Materials Research), Lars Nordström(Uppsala University), Taisuke Ozaki(The University of Tokyo), Lorenzo Paulatto(Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique), Chris J. Pickard(University of Cambridge), Ward Poelmans(University College Ghent), Matt Probert(University of York), Keith Refson(Rutherford Appleton Laboratory), Manuel Richter(Leibniz Institute for Solid State and Materials Research), Gian‐Marco Rignanese(UCLouvain), Santanu Saha(University of Basel), Matthias Scheffler(University of California, Santa Barbara), Martin Schlipf(University of California, Davis), Karlheinz Schwarz(TU Wien), S. Sharma(Max Planck Institute of Microstructure Physics), Francesca Tavazza(National Institute of Standards and Technology), Patrik Thunström(TU Wien), Alexandre Tkatchenko(University of Luxembourg), Marc Torrent(Commissariat à l'Énergie Atomique et aux Énergies Alternatives), David Vanderbilt(Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey), Michiel J. van Setten(UCLouvain), Véronique Van Speybroeck(Ghent University), J. M. Wills(Los Alamos National Laboratory), Jonathan R. Yates(University of Oxford), Guoxu Zhang(Harbin Institute of Technology), Stefaan Cottenier(Ghent University)
Science
March 24, 2016
Cited by 1,614Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

The widespread popularity of density functional theory has given rise to an extensive range of dedicated codes for predicting molecular and crystalline properties. However, each code implements the formalism in a different way, raising questions about the reproducibility of such predictions. We report the results of a community-wide effort that compared 15 solid-state codes, using 40 different potentials or basis set types, to assess the quality of the Perdew-Burke-Ernzerhof equations of state for 71 elemental crystals. We conclude that predictions from recent codes and pseudopotentials agree very well, with pairwise differences that are comparable to those between different high-precision experiments. Older methods, however, have less precise agreement. Our benchmark provides a framework for users and developers to document the precision of new applications and methodological improvements.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis