\text{ ,}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
-V_{\text{eff}}=V(\vec{r})+\int\frac{e^2n(\vec{r}')}{|\vec{r}-\vec{r}'|}d\vec{r}'
+V_{\text{eff}}(\vec{r})=V(\vec{r})+\int\frac{e^2n(\vec{r}')}{|\vec{r}-\vec{r}'|}d\vec{r}'
+ V_{\text{xc}(\vec{r})}
\text{ ,}
\label{eq:basics:kse2}
\label{eq:basics:kse3}
\end{equation}
where the local exchange-correlation potential $V_{\text{xc}}(\vec{r})$ is the partial derivative of the exchange-correlation functional $E_{\text{xc}}[n(\vec{r})]$ with respect to the charge density $n(\vec{r})$ for the ground-state $n_0(\vec{r})$.
-The first term in equation \eqref{eq:basics:kse1} corresponds to the kinetic energy of non-interacting electrons and the second term of equation \eqref{eq:basics:kse2} is just the Hartree contribution to the interaction energy.
+The first term in equation \eqref{eq:basics:kse1} corresponds to the kinetic energy of non-interacting electrons and the second term of equation \eqref{eq:basics:kse2} is just the Hartree contribution $V_{\text{H}}(\vec{r})$ to the interaction energy.
%\begin{equation}
%V_{\text{xc}}(\vec{r})=\frac{\partial}{\partial n(\vec{r})}
% E_{\text{xc}}[n(\vec{r})] |_{n(\vec{r})=n_0(\vec{r})}
However, these methods rely on the fact that the wave functions are localized and exhibit an exponential decay resulting in a sparse Hamiltonian.
Another approach is to represent the KS wave functions by plane waves.
-In fact, the employed {\textsc vasp} software is solving the KS equations within a plane-wave basis set.
+In fact, the employed {\textsc vasp} software is solving the KS equations within a plane-wave (PW) basis set.
The idea is based on the Bloch theorem \cite{bloch29}, which states that in a periodic crystal each electronic wave function $\Phi_i(\vec{r})$ can be written as the product of a wave-like envelope function $\exp(i\vec{kr})$ and a function that has the same periodicity as the lattice.
The latter one can be expressed by a Fourier series, i.e. a discrete set of plane waves whose wave vectors just correspond to reciprocal lattice vectors $\vec{G}$ of the crystal.
-Thus, the one-electron wave function $\Phi_i(\vec{r})$ associated with the wave vector $\vec{k}$ can be expanded in terms of a discrete plane-wave basis set
+Thus, the one-electron wave function $\Phi_i(\vec{r})$ associated with the wave vector $\vec{k}$ can be expanded in terms of a discrete PW basis set
\begin{equation}
\Phi_i(\vec{r})=\sum_{\vec{G}
%, |\vec{G}+\vec{k}|<G_{\text{cut}}}
The basis set, which in principle should be infinite, can be truncated to include only plane waves that have kinetic energies $\hbar^2|\vec{k}+\vec{G}|^2/2m$ less than a particular cut-off energy $E_{\text{cut}}$.
Although coefficients $c_{i,\vec{k}+\vec{G}}$ corresponding to small kinetic energies are typically more important, convergence with respect to the cut-off energy is crucial for the accuracy of the calculations.
Convergence with respect to the basis set, however, is easily achieved by increasing $E_{\text{cut}}$ until the respective differences in total energy approximate zero.
-Next to their simplicity, plane waves have several advantages.
-The basis set is orthonormal by construction.
-matrix elements of the Hamiltonian have a simple form (pw rep of ks equations)
-As mentioned above ... simple to check for convergence.
-Disadvantage ... periodic system required, but escapable by respective choice of the supercell.
-size of matrix to diagonalize determined by cut-off energy, severe
+Next to their simplicity, plane waves have several advantages.
+The basis set is orthonormal by construction and, as mentioned above, it is simple to check for convergence.
+The biggest advantage, however, is the ability to perform exact calculations by a discrete sum over a numerical grid.
+This is due to the related construction of the grid and the PW basis.
+Ofcourse, exactness is restricted by the fact that the PW basis set is finite.
+The simple form of the PW representation of the KS equations
+\begin{equation}
+\sum_{\vec{G}'} \left[
+ \frac{\hbar^2}{2m}|\vec{k}+\vec{G}|^2 \delta_{\vec{GG}'}
+ + \tilde{V}(\vec{G}-\vec{G}')
+ + \tilde{V}_{\text{H}}(\vec{G}-\vec{G}')
+ + \tilde{V}_{\text{xc}}(\vec{G}-\vec{G}')
+\right] c_{i,\vec{k}+\vec{G}} = \epsilon_i c_{i,\vec{k}+\vec{G}}
+\label{eq:basics:pwks}
+\end{equation}
+reveals further advantages.
+The various potentials are described in terms of their Fourier transforms.
+Equation \eqref{eq:basics:pwks} is solved by diagonalization of the Hamiltonian matrix $H_{\vec{k}+\vec{G},\vec{k}+\vec{G}'}$ given by the terms in the brackets.
+The gradient operator is diagonal in reciprocal space whereas the exchange-correlation potential has a diagonal representation in real space.
+This suggests to carry out different operations in real and reciprocal space, which requires frequent Fourier transformations.
+These, however, can be efficiently achieved by the fast Fourier transformation (FFT) algorithm.
+
+There are likewise disadvantages associated with the PW representation.
+By construction, PW calculations require a periodic system.
+This does not pose a severe problem since non-periodic systems can still be described by a suitable choice of the simulation cell.
+Describing a defect, for instance, requires the inclusion of enough bulk material in the simulation to prevent or reduce the interaction with its periodic, artificial images.
+As a consequence the number of atoms involved in the calculations are increased.
+To describe surfaces, sufficiently thick vacuum layers need to be included to avoid interaction of adjacent crystal slabs.
+Clearly, to appropriately approximate the wave functions and the respective charge density of a system composed of vacuum in addition to the solid in a PW basis, an increase of the cut-off energy is required.
+According to equation \eqref{eq:basics:pwks} the size of the Hamiltonian depends on the cut-off energy and, therefore, the computational effort is likewise increased.
+For the same reason, the description of tightly bound core electrons and the respective, highly localized charge density is hindered.
+However, a much more profound problem exists whenever wave functions for the core as well as the valence electrons need to be calculated within a PW basis set.
+Wave functions of the valence electrons exhibit rapid oscillations in the region occupied by the core electrons near the nuclei.
+The oscillations maintain the orthogonality between the wave functions of the core and valence electrons, which is compulsory due to the exclusion principle.
+Accurately approximating these oscillations demands for an extremely large PW basis set, which is too large for practical use.
+Fortunately, the impossibility to model the core in addition to the valence electrons is eliminated in the pseudopotential approach discussed in the next section.
\subsection{Pseudopotentials}
-Since core electrons tend to be concentrated very close to the atomic nuclei, resulting in large wavefunction and density gradients near the nuclei which are not easily described by a plane-wave basis set unless a very high energy cutoff, and therefore small wavelength, is used.
+As discussed in the last part of the previous section, an extremely large basis set of plane waves would be required to perform an all-electron calculation and a vast amount of computational time would be required to calculate the electronic wave functions.
+It is worth to stress out one more time, that this is due to the orthogonalization wiggles of the wave functions of valence electrons near the nuclei.
+Thus, existing core states practically prevent the use of a PW basis set.
+However, the core electrons, which are tightly bound to the nuclei, do not contribute significantly to chemical bonding or other physical properties of the solid.
+This fact is exploited in the pseudopotential approach \cite{} by removing the core electrons and replacing the atom and the associated strong ionic potential by a pseudoatom and a weaker pseudopotential that acts on a set of pseudo wave functions rather than the true valance wave functions.
+Certain conditions need to be fulfilled by the constructed pseudopotentials and the resulting pseudo wave functions.
+Outside the core region, the pseudo and real wafe functions as well as the generated charge densities need to be identical.
+...
+A pseudopotential is called norm-conserving if the pseudo and real charge contained within the core region match.
+...
\subsection{Brillouin zone sampling}
-Due to the Bloch theorem only a finite number of electronic wave functions need to be calculated for a periodic system.
+Following Bloch's theorem only a finite number of electronic wave functions need to be calculated for a periodic system.
However, to calculate quantities like the total energy or charge density, these have to be evaluated in a sum over an infinite number of $\vec{k}$ points.
Since the values of the wave function within a small interval around $\vec{k}$ are almost identical, it is possible to approximate the infinite sum by a sum over an affordable number of $k$ points, each representing the respective region of the wave function in $\vec{k}$ space.
-Methods have been derived for obtaining very accurate approximations by an intergration over special sets of $\vec{k}$ points \cite{}.
+Methods have been derived for obtaining very accurate approximations by a summation over special sets of $\vec{k}$ points with distinct, associated weights \cite{baldereschi73,chadi73,monkhorst76}.
If present, symmetries in reciprocal space may further reduce the number of calculations.
-For supercells, i.e. repeating unit cells that contain several primitive cells, sampling of the Brillouin zone restricted to the $\Gamma$ point can be quite accurately used, which is equivalent to calculating a single primitive cell using multiple $\vec{k}$ points.
+For supercells, i.e. repeating unit cells that contain several primitive cells, restricting the sampling of the Brillouin zone (BZ) to the $\Gamma$ point can yield quite accurat results.
+In fact, with respect to BZ sampling, calculating wave functions of a supercell containing $n$ primitive cells for only one $\vec{k}$ point is equivalent to the scenario of a single primitive cell and the summation over $n$ points in $\vec{k}$ space.
+In general, finer $\vec{k}$ point meshes better account for the periodicity of a system, which in some cases, however, might be fictious anyway.
\subsection{Hellmann-Feynman forces}
projects / lectures / latex.git / commitdiff