HF Parameters for defects in GaN

Problems running VASP: crashes, internal errors, "wrong" results.


Moderators: Global Moderator, Moderator

Post Reply
Message
Author
blair_tuttle
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2013 2:38 am

HF Parameters for defects in GaN

#1 Post by blair_tuttle » Thu Jul 10, 2025 1:33 pm

I recently started a project to investigate point defects in GaN. I have been unable to reproduce the hyperfine parameters from previous calculations [PRL 109, 206402 (2012)]. Specifically, my spin density values are much more delocalized especially when taking core polarization effects into account. Attached are the calculations and a summary doc. please advise.

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

blair_tuttle
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2013 2:38 am

Re: HF Parameters for defects in GaN

#2 Post by blair_tuttle » Thu Jul 10, 2025 4:34 pm

For more context, the author of the previous HF calculations [PRL 109, 206402 (2012)] mentioned that a relativistic expression for the HF parameters needs to be used for scalar relativistic pseudopotentials. I am not sure how this effects PAW results.


alexey.tal
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 414
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2021 12:45 pm

Re: HF Parameters for defects in GaN

#3 Post by alexey.tal » Fri Jul 11, 2025 4:45 pm

Dear blair_tuttle,

Thank you for your question.

Indeed, I see that the values reported in [PRL 109, 206402 (2012)] differ from the ones you find with VASP. However, I found some traces of HSE calculation in you INCAR, i.e., HFSCREEN = 0.2. But on the other hand you use LHFCALC=.FALSE.. After looking at the paper I can't tell if the results you use as a reference are produced with PBE or HSE. As far as I know, the choice of xc functional can largely affect the hyperfine tensor calculation (see Szász et al., Phys. Rev. B, 075202 (2013)). That would also explain why the spin density is much more delocalized in your case as the PBE tends to delocalized the charge density compared to hybrid functionals. Are you sure that it is the PBE values you are using as a reference and not HSE?

Kind regards,
Alexey


blair_tuttle
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2013 2:38 am

Re: HF Parameters for defects in GaN

#4 Post by blair_tuttle » Sat Jul 12, 2025 2:34 am

the tests I presented are for PBE calculations because the 2012 PRL used PBE. However, I have performed both HSE and PBE calculations, which is why the INCAR file has some HSE flags. i assume that using LHFCALC=.FALSE. nullifies the HFSCREEN = 0.2 flag. BTW, the PBE and HSE VASP results are very similar and differ from the 1012 PRL and experiment. The main difference i see between my VASP and the 2012 PRL is that the latter used norm-conserving pseudopotentials and a larger PWQ cutoff. They mentioned the need for a relativistic formula for HF parameters but i did not see any mention of such a formula in the VASP manual. thanks for any help to explain this VASP error.


Post Reply