Pseudopotentials that are responsive to heavy atoms and best fit to empirical data.
The best pseudopotential depends on the problem you want to solve and if you want to add spin-orbit effects or not.
As a general rule PAW pseudos tend to be the best, but it depends on what you want to study. In the following link you can find a comparison of the different QE pseudopotentials.
https://www.materialscloud.org/discover/sssp/table/precision
Thank you very much for your answer . I'm going to do dos and band calculations , and Calculate the energy of absorption for small gases
it is hard to determine a generally accurate method for all cases. The choice depends heavily on the system of interest. A lot of benchmarks may help to choose but they are also limited by their choice of dataset.
Therefore, the best way to choose a pseudo-potential should be reading literatures about calculations of systems similar to yours and using the most popular one.
In some cases, the QE pseudopotentials might be very problematic. The best way of choosing the right pseudopotential set(s) is(are) based on benchmarking. If your system have been investigated properly by former experiments of dft studies, it becomes easier. Nevertheless, you should be very cautious to select appropriate pp sets and testing is mandatory.
I advise you to compare your results with fundamental electronic properties of interested material such as band structure, DOS, atomic charges, lattice parameters, atomic distances, oxidation states and atomic magnetic moments. And, it will be better to give elaborate comparisons about your preliminary results to publish.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Physical Sciences
- Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics
- Atoms