They argue that the best behavior of simulated water is achieved with about 50% of Becke-Johnson damping with revPBE0+D3. There are two options - either compute every frame twice (zero damping and B-J) and average, or make up a halfway damping. Is it possible / straightforward to create such a halfway damping?
Thank you,
-Andrey
Jürg Hutter
unread,
Aug 2, 2024, 5:41:08 AM8/2/24
Reply to author
Sign in to reply to author
Forward
Sign in to forward
Delete
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Copy link
Report message
Show original message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to cp...@googlegroups.com
Hi
I don't know what "50% of Becke-Johnson damping with revPBE0+D3" really means, but you
can provide the input parameters to the D3(BJ) method with
________________________________________
From: cp...@googlegroups.com <cp...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Andrey Poletayev <andrey.p...@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, August 2, 2024 11:23 AM
To: cp2k
Subject: [CP2K:20526] creating a mixed van der Waals damping scheme
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Copy link
Report message
Show original message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to cp2k
Just to clarify the jargon in my orginal post: the chemRxiv argues that water ML potential trained with the revPBE0 functional and van der Waals damping set to average between zero and Becke-Johnson is the most accurate.
Thank you for the answer, it sounds like I could attempt to halve the relevant coefficients first.
Andrey
Andrey Poletayev
unread,
Aug 2, 2024, 9:47:58 AM8/2/24
Reply to author
Sign in to reply to author
Forward
Sign in to forward
Delete
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Copy link
Report message
Show original message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to cp2k
Poking around the documentation, it seems I should be able to repeat the PAIR_POTENTIAL section twice, one for the DFTD3 zero damping, and the second for DFTD3(BJ), each with SCALING of 0.5, to average the two dispersions, each with its appropriate parameters set by D3_SCALING and D3BJ_SCALING respectively.
Does this seem reasonable / is SCALING just a linear strength coefficient?
The default of 0 on SCALING is a bit confusing because I would think the default SCALING would be 1.