<div>Dear Andrea:</div>
<div> </div>
<div> Tonight , i tried to derive the generalized Landauer-like formula you gave in <strong>PRB 72 125114</strong> . While, with result of Eq(15), I cannot obtain the final result of Eq(17). I then checked it again, I found Eq(15) may be given with print error, omitting subscript 0 in this expression
<strong>[\Sigma_L^{<,>} + \Sigma_R^{<,>} ]</strong> , which should be with a form like this : <strong>[\Sigma_{0L}^{<,>} + \Sigma_[0R]^{<,>} ] . </strong>It could also be obtained by inserting Eq(12) into Eq(9). would you please confirm it for me ?
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Regards,</div>
<div>hai-ping</div>
<div><br><br> </div>
<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/13/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Andrea Ferretti</b> <<a href="mailto:ferretti.andrea@unimore.it">ferretti.andrea@unimore.it</a>> wrote:</span>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid"><br>Dear Hai-Ping,<br><br>> Basically, both PWCOND and WANT are post-process tools for analyzing<br>> conductance and complex bandstructure. Is it right ?
<br>> While i donot know much the differenc between them, though i read some<br>> seminal papers about MLWFs and NEGF techniques used in WanT package.<br>><br><br>a small aside note:<br>the complex band structure calculation is performed only by PWCOND, which
<br>then solves the scattering problem for the system under study and<br>evaluates the transmittance (as you can find better explained in the papers cited by<br>Andrea).<br>WanT solves the same problem but using the "maximally localized" Wannier
<br>function basis + a matrix green function approach (no need here for the<br>complex band structure)<br><br>a short description of the difference between the two approaches can<br>be also found in a previous post to this forum
<br><br><a href="http://www.democritos.it/pipermail/pw_forum/2006-January/003479.html">http://www.democritos.it/pipermail/pw_forum/2006-January/003479.html</a><br><br>cheers<br>Andrea<br><br><br>--<br>Andrea Ferretti<br>National Research Center S3, CNR-INFM (
<a href="http://s3.infm.it">http://s3.infm.it</a> )<br>Dipartimento di Fisica, Universita' di Modena e Reggio Emilia<br>Via Campi 213/A I-41100 Modena, Italy<br>Tel: +39 059 2055301<br>Fax: +39 059 374794<br>E-mail:
<a href="mailto:ferretti.andrea@unimore.it">ferretti.andrea@unimore.it</a><br>URL: <a href="http://www.nanoscience.unimo.it">http://www.nanoscience.unimo.it</a><br><br>Please, if possible, don't send me MS Word or PowerPoint attachments
<br>Why? See: <a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html">http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html</a><br><br><br>On Wed, 13 Sep 2006, lan haiping wrote:<br><br>> Dear all,<br>><br>
> Basically, both PWCOND and WANT are post-process tools for analyzing<br>> conductance and complex bandstructure. Is it right ?<br>> While i donot know much the differenc between them, though i read some<br>
> seminal papers about MLWFs and NEGF techniques used in WanT package. I<br>> tried to dig out the Doc for PWCOND , but failed . Would you please give me<br>> some hints and help ?<br>><br>> Regards,<br>
><br>> Hai-Ping<br>><br>_______________________________________________<br>Pw_forum mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Pw_forum@pwscf.org">Pw_forum@pwscf.org</a><br><a href="http://www.democritos.it/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum">
http://www.democritos.it/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum</a><br></blockquote></div><br>