![]() |
![]() |
Figure 6 shows the comparison between calculations
on a 4 atom unit cell aluminium bulk using Fermi and Methfessel-Paxton
smearing methods. We only did non-self-consistency calculations. We
can see that Fermi smearing leads to different energy results as we
increase smearing factor . We can see that the difference
between Free energy and the calculated ground-state energy (we called
it Harris energy) also increased dramatically for Fermi smearing. This
is expected as the smearing does correspond to the physical temperature and
as
increases we depart from the zero-temperature regime. On the
other hand, the smearing in Methfessel-Paxton method is just a
parameter used in the approximation. And we can see that increasing
has small effect on the energies calculated using
Methfessel-Paxton smearing and results also improve as the order of
Hermite polynomials used increases. This means a relatively large
smearing factor can be used under Methfessel-Paxton approximation,
which allows fewer
-points. To be more specific, figure
7 shows that for smearing factor
, (corresponding to smearing temperature
of about 31565.51 K), we reach
-point convergence at about 10
Bloch space (
) points per each reciprocal lattice direction,
while the total energy will be within
Ha of the ground state
energies calculated using low smearing and large number of
-points. This is compared with the requirement of 25
-points for convergence with a small smearing factor, see
figure 8.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Lianheng Tong 2011-03-02