The DOS calculation took considerably longer when using ISMEAR=-5

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

Moderators: Global Moderator, Moderator

Post Reply
Message
Author
zrqustc
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2020 4:03 am

The DOS calculation took considerably longer when using ISMEAR=-5

#1 Post by zrqustc » Tue Jun 13, 2023 9:40 pm

Dear Developer,

I would like to bring to your attention a significant difference in computation time between DOS calculations performed with ISMEAR=-5 and ISMEAR=0.
I have attached the input and output files for your reference. While the SCF calculations took a similar amount of time for both ISMEAR values, the DOS calculations with ISMEAR=-5 took considerably longer.

I would greatly appreciate your guidance and suggestions on how to optimize the calculations when using ISMEAR=-5 to improve efficiency. I am also curious to know if there could be a potential bug in VASP related to this issue.

Thank you for your attention to this matter, and I look forward to your assistance.

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

zrqustc
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2020 4:03 am

Re: The DOS calculation took considerably longer when using ISMEAR=-5

#2 Post by zrqustc » Wed Aug 23, 2023 2:48 pm

Dear Developers,

This is a follow-up message. I am wondering if you have any suggestions for this problem.

Best,
Ruiqi

manuel_engel1
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 65
Joined: Mon May 08, 2023 4:08 pm

Re: The DOS calculation took considerably longer when using ISMEAR=-5

#3 Post by manuel_engel1 » Thu Aug 24, 2023 7:38 am

Dear Ruiqi,

Sorry for the late response. Indeed we can confirm a considerable slowdown with ISMEAR=-5. We have implemented a fix that will make it into future versions of VASP. Thank you for your report.
Manuel
VASP developer

zrqustc
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2020 4:03 am

Re: The DOS calculation took considerably longer when using ISMEAR=-5

#4 Post by zrqustc » Thu Aug 24, 2023 2:50 pm

Thanks, Manuel.

Looking forward to the new version.

Best,
Ruiqi

Post Reply