Messages

1

General Questions and Answers / Re: Publication reference for the ML-DFT Density Predictor

« on: September 3, 2026, 08:51 »

Hi,

We don't have a paper reference paper about the ML-DFT capabilities in QuantumATK. Hopefully we will make one soon.
We use a modified version of the DeepDFT code (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41524-022-00863-y) that you may cite in addition to the normal QuantumATK citations.

Best regards,
Troels

2

Scripts, Tutorials and Applications / Re: Optical Spectrum calculation completes without output in X-2025.06, works in X-2

« on: August 14, 2025, 09:24 »

Hi,
We recently introduced a new "transition_matrix_operator" method keyword in OpticalSpectrum. The default for LCAO calculatios is "transition_matrix_operator=VelocityOperator", which should include the non-local contribution from the Hamiltonian (pseudo-potential term or exact exchange contribution) more accurately than in the old 'transition_matrix_operator=MomentumOperator' approach, which assumes that the Hamiltonian is local. However, I can reproduce a hanging (or very slow) process, so I suggest that you switch back to the old method by modifying your script as:

optical_spectrum = OpticalSpectrum(
    configuration=mose2_ar10cif,
    transition_matrix_operator=MomentumOperator,
)

You can also choose the transition matrix operator in the GUI workflow builder when editing the OpticalSpectrum.

3

General Questions and Answers / Re: Definition of Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya Interactions in QuantumATK

« on: June 4, 2025, 12:56 »

The DMI vectors are calculated following this paper https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.01910v2, Eq. (17) and they are not scaled by the Si*Sj in the output.

4

General Questions and Answers / Re: 23.12-sp1IVCurve can not open with IV-Curve Analyzer

« on: March 14, 2025, 13:54 »

Hi, we recommend to use the IVCharacteristics study object for IV calculations. However, I hope you can use the attached script to analyze your IVCurve data. In the script the total and spin-resolved currents are plotted and also the conductances and transmission spectra. Hopefully you can adapt it to your needs, otherwise let us know.

5

General Questions and Answers / Re: OptimizeDeviceConfiguration

« on: September 11, 2024, 09:19 »

Yes, the 'width of the optimization region' is meant as the same as the 'Optimization region length'. Only the atoms inside this optimization region, defined by the 'Optimization region length' and 'Optimization region center' will be relaxed. This is indicated by the red box in this image https://docs.quantumatk.com/_images/before_after_default.png from the tutorial.

6

Scripts, Tutorials and Applications / Re: Magnon dispersion

« on: January 29, 2024, 13:47 »

Hi,

No, the magnetic anisotropy energy is not included in the magnon bandstructure.

Kind regards

7

Scripts, Tutorials and Applications / Re: Heisenberg exchange coupling Jij(R=0)

« on: November 10, 2023, 13:19 »

Hi,

The 'on-site' exchange parameter Jii should not be regarded as a physical result, but rather be ignored in the case of molecules, where it's currently calculated.

Concerning plotting of the Jij values I would recommend to use the  build-in HeisenbergExchange analyzer available in QATK 2023.09. With this version I get the same results as shown in the tutorial about HeisenbergExchange http://docs.quantumatk.com/tutorials/heisenberg_exchange/heisenberg_exchange.html#id21 , also using the plot_Jij_vs_r.py script.

8

General Questions and Answers / Re: Unable to open bandgap of FeO (GGA+U & HSE06)

« on: June 16, 2023, 10:01 »

A small update: When using filling_method=Anisotropic, HSE06 also leads to solution with a band gap.

9

General Questions and Answers / Re: Unable to open bandgap of FeO (GGA+U & HSE06)

« on: June 14, 2023, 10:58 »

Hi,
I have been looking into this issue. It turns out to be related to the initial occupation of the orbitals. This is controlled by the parameter "filling_method" on the BasisSet. By default this 'SphericalSymmetric' meaning that all orbitals within a particular shell (e.g. all the d-orbitals) will have the same initial occupation. However, this might trap the solution in a wrong local minimum. In your case the solution comes out with equal occupation of the xy, xz, and yz orbitals for the minority spin. However, according to this paper DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.97.035107 the solution should rather be a single occupied orbital (xy) for the minority spin. This you can actually achieve if you initialize the orbital occupations differently by setting  "filling_method=Anisotropic" on the Fe basis set (if you are using GGA+U this can also be set in the GUI, where you specify the U-values). By doing so you end up with a solution that indeed has a band gap - see attached PDOS plot, where I show the DOS projected on the first Fe atom on spin up and down. The script for the calculation is also attached.

10

General Questions and Answers / Re: Heisenberg exchange: QuantumATK T-2022.03

« on: June 7, 2022, 14:28 »

Hi Dongzhe,

This is partly intended behavior since in our implementation, the calculation of the J_ij matrix elements require that all the atoms are located within a single unit cell. Since your configuration have some negative fractional coordinates, it will internally wrap the configuration and trigger a restart. Note, however, that the second update uses the already updated configuration and only takes 5 steps to converge (vs. 28 for the first update).

Also, I just found out now, that the check for doing a restart is too tight meaning that the program will often perform a restart even if it isn't really necessary. But again, this is just a few additional SCF steps.

Regards,
Troels

11

General Questions and Answers / Re: The overlap matrix of periodic functions

« on: April 5, 2022, 10:02 »

Hi,

Since the overlap matrix depends on k, the easiest way to calculate the overlap between two Bloch states at two different k-point is to do it in a real-space representation. For this you can use the BlochState analysis object. I have attached a script, which calculates the overlap between two Bloch states in Silicon. I hope this can help you.

Regards,
Troels

12

General Questions and Answers / Re: What is the unit for effective mass ?

« on: October 15, 2021, 14:47 »

Hi,

The unit for effective mass is the electron (rest) mass of 9.10938356 × 10^-31 kilograms.

Regards,

13

General Questions and Answers / Re: LU factorization failed

« on: May 10, 2021, 09:59 »

Hi,

Can you share a python script that reproduces the error?

Regards,
Troels

14

General Questions and Answers / Re: Can not repeat the result of piezoelectric coefficients of example GaAs

« on: December 3, 2020, 16:47 »

Hi Florian,

I have attached a modified script, which I believe works correctly. Indeed the documentation has not been updated along with changed defaults and it also doesn't reflect the defaults in PiezoElectricTensor calculation.

For calculations involving the Berry phase Polarization (i.e. Polarization, BornEffectiveCharges, and PiezoElectricTensor) it is often necessary to decrease the electronic temperature from the default of 1000 K.

For the PiezoElectricTensor calculation itself, notice that we can calculate either the clamped ion contribution or the full contribution. The former is calculated by setting

Code

optimize_geometry=False

while the later is obtained with

Code

optimize_geometry=True

Both calculations are performed in the attached script.

Regards,
Troels

15

General Questions and Answers / Re: how to calculate dynamics of magnetizations

« on: October 19, 2020, 09:01 »

Hi,

While QuantumATK can be used to calculate parameters entering the LLG equation (spin transfer torque, Gilbert damping, magnetic moments, etc.) we currently do not have any modules for calculating the magnetization dynamics by solving the LLG equation. This part was implemented by the authors them-self in the cited paper. Notice also that the calculation of spin-orbit torque was implemented by the authors them-self.

Regards,
Troels