<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.DefaultFontHxMailStyle
{mso-style-name:"Default Font HxMail Style";
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;
text-decoration:none none;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span class=DefaultFontHxMailStyle><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Dear Timofey <o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=DefaultFontHxMailStyle><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=DefaultFontHxMailStyle><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Yes the compensation is between the Hartree term and the Ewald sum works independently from the functional.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=DefaultFontHxMailStyle><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=DefaultFontHxMailStyle><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Hopefully energy values should not be completely different, just small differences which should decrease with the distance. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=DefaultFontHxMailStyle><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>About using the Makov-Payne corrections directly, I think you need to be a little bit more careful and check directly how the formation energy of the defects behaves increasing the distance between the periodic images. The additional charges around the defects must be localized enough with respect of the supercell size in order that their electric moments are well defined. In case of HfO2 I guess that together with the charge density the result should also be influenced by the electric displacement density around the charged defects (HfO2 deforms signicantly in response to electric fields). <o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=DefaultFontHxMailStyle><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=DefaultFontHxMailStyle><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Regards <o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=DefaultFontHxMailStyle><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Pietro <o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=DefaultFontHxMailStyle><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p><p class=MsoNormal>Sent from <a href="https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986">Mail</a> for Windows 10</p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=DefaultFontHxMailStyle><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p><div style='mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='border:none;padding:0in'><b>From: </b><a href="mailto:timson@isp.nsc.ru">Тимофей Перевалов</a><br><b>Sent: </b>Thursday, July 23, 2020 1:40 PM<br><b>To: </b><a href="mailto:users@lists.quantum-espresso.org">users@lists.quantum-espresso.org</a><br><b>Subject: </b>[QE-users] Thermal trap ionizations energy evaluation</p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=DefaultFontHxMailStyle><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p><p class=MsoNormal>Dear QE users and developers,</p><p class=MsoNormal>I need your help. I am evaluating the thermal ionizations energy of O vacancy in HfO2 as it described the article [PRB 75, 205336, 2007]. One of the calculation formulas (in adapted form) used: (E(perf, q=-1) - E(perf, q=0)) � (E(def, q= -1) - E(def, q= 0)). I know about the compensation background charge presence and I hope that its contribution is cancelled since in formulas, there is a double subtraction. How true is this? I am exploiting B3LYP functional. What should be considered in calculations of this kind?</p><p class=MsoNormal>The resulting values depend on the supercell size. How do I get rid of this? Obviously due to the background charge contribution. The calculations with the Makov-Payne correction (for c-HfO2) give completely different values and also depend on the on the supercell size. </p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Sincerely,</p><p class=MsoNormal>Timofey Perevalov</p><p class=MsoNormal>ISP SBRAS, Russia</p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>_______________________________________________</p><p class=MsoNormal>Quantum ESPRESSO is supported by MaX (www.max-centre.eu/quantum-espresso)</p><p class=MsoNormal>users mailing list users@lists.quantum-espresso.org</p><p class=MsoNormal>https://lists.quantum-espresso.org/mailman/listinfo/users</p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=DefaultFontHxMailStyle><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p></div></body></html>