DOCSLIB.ORG

Arxiv:1807.00704V2 [Physics.Chem-Ph] 1 Aug 2018 Ware by Swapping the Integral Calculator

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arxiv:1807.00704V2 [Physics.Chem-Ph] 1 Aug 2018 Ware by Swapping the Integral Calculator Towards quantum-chemical method development for arbitrary basis functions Michael F. Herbst,1, a) Andreas Dreuw,1, b) and James Emil Avery2, c) 1)Interdisciplinary Center for Scientific Computing, Heidelberg University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 205, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany 2)Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 17, 2100 København, Denmark We present the design of a flexible quantum-chemical method development framework, which supports em- ploying any type of basis function. This design has been implemented in the light-weight program package molsturm, yielding a basis-function-independent self-consistent field scheme. Versatile interfaces, making use of open standards like python, mediate the integration of molsturm with existing third-party packages. In this way both rapid extension of the present set of methods for electronic structure calculations as well as adding new basis function types can be readily achieved. This makes molsturm well-suitable for testing novel approaches for discretising the electronic wave function and allows comparing them to existing methods using the same software stack. This is illustrated by two examples, an implementation of coupled-cluster doubles as well as a gradient-free geometry optimisation, where in both cases, an arbitrary basis functions could be used. molsturm is open-source and can be obtained from http://molsturm.org. Keywords: electronic structure theory, method development, basis-function independence, molsturm I. INTRODUCTION employing specialised contracted basis sets4,5. However, even contracted GTOs (cGTO) fail to describe both the The central goal of electronic-structure theory is to find nuclear cusp and the exponential decay of the electron 6 approximate solutions to the electronic wave equation nu- density . In addition, no matter the number of GTO merically. This requires a discretisation of the electronic basis functions used, the derivatives are always wrong wave function. Typically, it is approximated as a linear at the nucleus, which causes singularities and computa- combination of Slater determinants: anti-symmetrised tional failure for example in quantum Monte Carlo cal- 7{9 products of single-particle functions. The latter are in culations . Furthermore the description of some prop- turn constructed by expanding them in a basis set of a erties such as the nuclear-magnetic resonance (NMR) priori determined single-electron functions. Usually, such shielding tensors or a description of Rydberg-like or auto- 10{13 basis sets are not complete and introduce basis set errors. ionising states directly involves the nuclear cusp or Proper choice of the basis function type and size of ba- the asymptotic tail, making physically accurate basis 14,15 sis set is thus decisive for an accurate description of the functions desirable . system under investigation. It is also clear from the on- The name of our implementation, \molsturm", is a set that different basis function types can be more or portmanteau of molecular Sturmians: the project was less suited for a specific problem, suggesting to conduct born as a means to solve the problem of using state- investigations across existing basis function types. of-the-art quantum chemistry methods together with Gaussian-based methods are overwhelmingly predomi- generalised- and molecular Sturmian basis functions. nant in computational electronic structure theory, which The many promising results for generalised Sturmians stems from pragmatic reasons dating back to the found- were stranded due to the fact that only electronic struc- ing years1,2. It was well-known that bound state ture problems that were small enough to be solved by di- electronic wave functions decay exponentially both at rect configuration interaction methods could be treated, short and large distances from the nuclei3, but multi- preventing wider use. The existing mature quantum centre electron-repulsion integrals (ERI) of products of chemistry software has been developed over hundreds exponential-type orbitals were impractically difficult to of man-years, and the methods are not easily reimple- calculate. For Gaussian-type orbitals (GTO), on the mented from scratch. other hand, ERI could be calculated efficiently due to In theory, it should be a simple matter to include new the Gaussian Product Theorem. However, the computa- basis function types in existing quantum chemistry soft- tional challenges facing quantum chemists have changed arXiv:1807.00704v2 [physics.chem-ph] 1 Aug 2018 ware by swapping the integral calculator. In practice, since the 1970's, and it may now be worth trading extra it turned out to be exceedingly difficult due to the very computation per integral for having fewer, more accurate large and complicated code bases of all the investigated basis functions. quantum chemistry software. Assumptions about the ba- In many practical applications, the shortcomings of sis function type scattered around the source code only GTOs are not important, or one is able to compensate by make this even task more difficult. Our solution, which is presented in this paper, is to implement a light-weight layer that makes it easy to ex- a)Electronic mail: [email protected] periment with many different basis function types and b)Electronic mail: [email protected] quantum-chemical methods. It is designed for researchers c)Electronic mail: [email protected] to both build simple stand-alone programs for prototyp- 2 ing and teaching purposes, and to make plug-in modules of introducing a new basis function type to be reduced to be hosted in standard quantum chemistry software. to adding an extra integral back end in molsturm, which To the best of our knowledge such a framework with the will then both provide simple stand-alone calculations ability to explore quantum-chemical methods across mul- and a common interface to hook into existing quantum tiple basis function types has been missing up to today. chemistry packages. A. Alternative Basis Function Types B. Towards Basis-type Agnostic Quantum Chemistry Many research groups have worked on alternative ba- In order to reach a basis-type agnostic design, there sis function types. This section will provide a brief are three fundamental components to consider: (i) overview with particular focus on exponential-type or- an integral interface accommodating a wide range of bitals (ETO). For further details regarding the basis func- very different basis set types and discretisation, but tion mentioned, the reader is referred to the cited works. providing a uniform way of accessing them, (ii) sim- Efforts on making various types of ETOs computation- ple discretisation-agnostic implementations of the self- ally feasible were pioneered by Harris, Michels, Stein- consistent field (SCF) algorithms, and (iii) a flexible in- born, Weniger, Weatherford, Jones, and others16{19.A terface to employ the resulting SCF orbital basis further particular form of complete ETO basis are Coulomb Stur- in existing, third-party code. Once the SCF orbitals have mians20{24 (CS). Their functional form is identical to the been obtained, the remainder of a calculation, e.g. a Post- familiar hydrogen-like orbitals, just with all occurrences Hartree-Fock (Post-HF) method, can usually be formu- of the factors Z=r replaced by the Sturmian exponent k lated entirely in the SCF orbital basis, without reference | a parameter, which is the same for all functions of the to the underlying basis functions. Thus, a basis-function basis: independent SCF scheme automatically leads to basis- function independent Post-HF methods as well. CS 3=2 l kr 2l+1 m 'nlm(r) = k Nnl(2kr) e− Ln l 1(2kr)Yl (r^): (1) This structure has another advantageous side effect in − − the context of developing new basis function types, as m 2l+1 In this, Yl is a spherical harmonic, Ln l 1 an associated it allows to perform comparisons between old and new Laguerre polynomial and − − methods using exactly the same software stack. In other words one can thus be sure that, apart from the discreti- s 2 (l + n)! sation, all aspects of the calculation e.g. SCF algorithms N = (2) nl (2l + 1)! n(n l 1)! or guess methods, are optimised at the same level lead- − − ing to a fair apples-to-apples comparison between old and a normalisation constant. CS functions proved to be new methods. especially easy to work with, since their momentum- space representation by hyperspherical harmonics allows efficient calculation of multi-centre integrals, opening C. Paper Outline the way for efficient molecular calculations25{28. The Coulomb Sturmian construction generalises well and gen- The remainder of the paper is structured as follows: eralised Sturmian basis sets preserving many useful Stur- Section II reviews existing projects with similar goals to mian properties can be constructed. These allow, for ex- molsturm. Section III provides a theoretical background ample, to build N-particle basis functions that include for the program design choices, which are described in important geometric properties of the physical system Section IV. Section V provides example problems calcu- under consideration at the level of the basis29{37. Sim- lated using molsturm's python interface, illustrating how ilarly, d-dimensional hyperspherical harmonic basis sets to implement new methods on top of molsturm in a few can model collective motions of particles, for example lines of python. Section VI outlines the current state of for treating strongly interacting few-body systems or re- molsturm and what we hope to achieve
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Free and Open Source Software for Computational Chemistry Education
    Free and Open Source Software for Computational Chemistry Education Susi Lehtola∗,y and Antti J. Karttunenz yMolecular Sciences Software Institute, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061, United States zDepartment of Chemistry and Materials Science, Aalto University, Espoo, Finland E-mail: [email protected].fi Abstract Long in the making, computational chemistry for the masses [J. Chem. Educ. 1996, 73, 104] is finally here. We point out the existence of a variety of free and open source software (FOSS) packages for computational chemistry that offer a wide range of functionality all the way from approximate semiempirical calculations with tight- binding density functional theory to sophisticated ab initio wave function methods such as coupled-cluster theory, both for molecular and for solid-state systems. By their very definition, FOSS packages allow usage for whatever purpose by anyone, meaning they can also be used in industrial applications without limitation. Also, FOSS software has no limitations to redistribution in source or binary form, allowing their easy distribution and installation by third parties. Many FOSS scientific software packages are available as part of popular Linux distributions, and other package managers such as pip and conda. Combined with the remarkable increase in the power of personal devices—which rival that of the fastest supercomputers in the world of the 1990s—a decentralized model for teaching computational chemistry is now possible, enabling students to perform reasonable modeling on their own computing devices, in the bring your own device 1 (BYOD) scheme. In addition to the programs’ use for various applications, open access to the programs’ source code also enables comprehensive teaching strategies, as actual algorithms’ implementations can be used in teaching.
    [Show full text]
  • Basis Sets Running a Calculation • in Performing a Computational
    Session 2: Basis Sets • Two of the major methods (ab initio and DFT) require some understanding of basis sets and basis functions • This session describes the essentials of basis sets: – What they are – How they are constructed – How they are used – Significance in choice 1 Running a Calculation • In performing a computational chemistry calculation, the chemist has to make several decisions of input to the code: – The molecular geometry (and spin state) – The basis set used to determine the wavefunction – The properties to be calculated – The type(s) of calculations and any accompanying assumptions 2 Running a calculation •For ab initio or DFT calculations, many programs require a basis set choice to be made – The basis set is an approx- imate representation of the atomic orbitals (AOs) – The program then calculates molecular orbitals (MOs) using the Linear Combin- ation of Atomic Orbitals (LCAO) approximation 3 Computational Chemistry Map Chemist Decides: Computer calculates: Starting Molecular AOs determine the Geometry AOs O wavefunction (ψ) Basis Set (with H H ab initio and DFT) Type of Calculation LCAO (Method and Assumptions) O Properties to HH be Calculated MOs 4 Critical Choices • Choice of the method (and basis set) used is critical • Which method? • Molecular Mechanics, Ab initio, Semiempirical, or DFT • Which approximation? • MM2, MM3, HF, AM1, PM3, or B3LYP, etc. • Which basis set (if applicable)? • Minimal basis set • Split-valence • Polarized, Diffuse, High Angular Momentum, ...... 5 Why is Basis Set Choice Critical? • The
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Hartree-Fock Molecular Orbital Theory
    An Introduction to Hartree-Fock Molecular Orbital Theory C. David Sherrill School of Chemistry and Biochemistry Georgia Institute of Technology June 2000 1 Introduction Hartree-Fock theory is fundamental to much of electronic structure theory. It is the basis of molecular orbital (MO) theory, which posits that each electron's motion can be described by a single-particle function (orbital) which does not depend explicitly on the instantaneous motions of the other electrons. Many of you have probably learned about (and maybe even solved prob- lems with) HucÄ kel MO theory, which takes Hartree-Fock MO theory as an implicit foundation and throws away most of the terms to make it tractable for simple calculations. The ubiquity of orbital concepts in chemistry is a testimony to the predictive power and intuitive appeal of Hartree-Fock MO theory. However, it is important to remember that these orbitals are mathematical constructs which only approximate reality. Only for the hydrogen atom (or other one-electron systems, like He+) are orbitals exact eigenfunctions of the full electronic Hamiltonian. As long as we are content to consider molecules near their equilibrium geometry, Hartree-Fock theory often provides a good starting point for more elaborate theoretical methods which are better approximations to the elec- tronic SchrÄodinger equation (e.g., many-body perturbation theory, single-reference con¯guration interaction). So...how do we calculate molecular orbitals using Hartree-Fock theory? That is the subject of these notes; we will explain Hartree-Fock theory at an introductory level. 2 What Problem Are We Solving? It is always important to remember the context of a theory.
    [Show full text]
  • User Manual for the Uppsala Quantum Chemistry Package UQUANTCHEM V.35
    User manual for the Uppsala Quantum Chemistry package UQUANTCHEM V.35 by Petros Souvatzis Uppsala 2016 Contents 1 Introduction 6 2 Compiling the code 7 3 What Can be done with UQUANTCHEM 9 3.1 Hartree Fock Calculations . 9 3.2 Configurational Interaction Calculations . 9 3.3 M¨ollerPlesset Calculations (MP2) . 9 3.4 Density Functional Theory Calculations (DFT)) . 9 3.5 Time Dependent Density Functional Theory Calculations (TDDFT)) . 10 3.6 Quantum Montecarlo Calculations . 10 3.7 Born Oppenheimer Molecular Dynamics . 10 4 Setting up a UQANTCHEM calculation 12 4.1 The input files . 12 4.1.1 The INPUTFILE-file . 12 4.1.2 The BASISFILE-file . 13 4.1.3 The BASISFILEAUX-file . 14 4.1.4 The DENSMATSTARTGUESS.dat-file . 14 4.1.5 The MOLDYNRESTART.dat-file . 14 4.1.6 The INITVELO.dat-file . 15 4.1.7 Running Uquantchem . 15 4.2 Input parameters . 15 4.2.1 CORRLEVEL ................................. 15 4.2.2 ADEF ..................................... 15 4.2.3 DOTDFT ................................... 16 4.2.4 NSCCORR ................................... 16 4.2.5 SCERR .................................... 16 4.2.6 MIXTDDFT .................................. 16 4.2.7 EPROFILE .................................. 16 4.2.8 DOABSSPECTRUM ............................... 17 4.2.9 NEPERIOD .................................. 17 4.2.10 EFIELDMAX ................................. 17 4.2.11 EDIR ..................................... 17 4.2.12 FIELDDIR .................................. 18 4.2.13 OMEGA .................................... 18 2 CONTENTS 3 4.2.14 NCHEBGAUSS ................................. 18 4.2.15 RIAPPROX .................................. 18 4.2.16 LIMPRECALC (Only openmp-version) . 19 4.2.17 DIAGDG ................................... 19 4.2.18 NLEBEDEV .................................. 19 4.2.19 MOLDYN ................................... 19 4.2.20 DAMPING ................................... 19 4.2.21 XLBOMD ..................................
    [Show full text]
  • Python Tools in Computational Chemistry (And Biology)
    Python Tools in Computational Chemistry (and Biology) Andrew Dalke Dalke Scientific, AB Göteborg, Sweden EuroSciPy, 26-27 July, 2008 “Why does ‘import numpy’ take 0.4 seconds? Does it need to import 228 libraries?” - My first Numpy-discussion post (paraphrased) Your use case isn't so typical and so suffers on the import time end of the balance. - Response from Robert Kern (Others did complain. Import time down to 0.28s.) 52,000 structures PDB doubles every 2½ years HEADER PHOTORECEPTOR 23-MAY-90 1BRD 1BRD 2 COMPND BACTERIORHODOPSIN 1BRD 3 SOURCE (HALOBACTERIUM $HALOBIUM) 1BRD 4 EXPDTA ELECTRON DIFFRACTION 1BRD 5 AUTHOR R.HENDERSON,J.M.BALDWIN,T.A.CESKA,F.ZEMLIN,E.BECKMANN, 1BRD 6 AUTHOR 2 K.H.DOWNING 1BRD 7 REVDAT 3 15-JAN-93 1BRDB 1 SEQRES 1BRDB 1 REVDAT 2 15-JUL-91 1BRDA 1 REMARK 1BRDA 1 .. ATOM 54 N PRO 8 20.397 -15.569 -13.739 1.00 20.00 1BRD 136 ATOM 55 CA PRO 8 21.592 -15.444 -12.900 1.00 20.00 1BRD 137 ATOM 56 C PRO 8 21.359 -15.206 -11.424 1.00 20.00 1BRD 138 ATOM 57 O PRO 8 21.904 -15.930 -10.563 1.00 20.00 1BRD 139 ATOM 58 CB PRO 8 22.367 -14.319 -13.591 1.00 20.00 1BRD 140 ATOM 59 CG PRO 8 22.089 -14.564 -15.053 1.00 20.00 1BRD 141 ATOM 60 CD PRO 8 20.647 -15.054 -15.103 1.00 20.00 1BRD 142 ATOM 61 N GLU 9 20.562 -14.211 -11.095 1.00 20.00 1BRD 143 ATOM 62 CA GLU 9 20.192 -13.808 -9.737 1.00 20.00 1BRD 144 ATOM 63 C GLU 9 19.567 -14.935 -8.932 1.00 20.00 1BRD 145 ATOM 64 O GLU 9 19.815 -15.104 -7.724 1.00 20.00 1BRD 146 ATOM 65 CB GLU 9 19.248 -12.591 -9.820 1.00 99.00 1 1BRD 147 ATOM 66 CG GLU 9 19.902 -11.351 -10.387 1.00 99.00 1 1BRD 148 ATOM 67 CD GLU 9 19.243 -10.169 -10.980 1.00 99.00 1 1BRD 149 ATOM 68 OE1 GLU 9 18.323 -10.191 -11.782 1.00 99.00 1 1BRD 150 ATOM 69 OE2 GLU 9 19.760 -9.089 -10.597 1.00 99.00 1 1BRD 151 ATOM 70 N TRP 10 18.764 -15.737 -9.597 1.00 20.00 1BRD 152 ATOM 71 CA TRP 10 18.034 -16.884 -9.090 1.00 20.00 1BRD 153 ATOM 72 C TRP 10 18.843 -17.908 -8.318 1.00 20.00 1BRD 154 ATOM 73 O TRP 10 18.376 -18.310 -7.230 1.00 20.00 1BRD 155 .
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to DFT and the Plane-Wave Pseudopotential Method
    Introduction to DFT and the plane-wave pseudopotential method Keith Refson STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Chilton, Didcot, OXON OX11 0QX 23 Apr 2014 Parallel Materials Modelling Packages @ EPCC 1 / 55 Introduction Synopsis Motivation Some ab initio codes Quantum-mechanical approaches Density Functional Theory Electronic Structure of Condensed Phases Total-energy calculations Introduction Basis sets Plane-waves and Pseudopotentials How to solve the equations Parallel Materials Modelling Packages @ EPCC 2 / 55 Synopsis Introduction A guided tour inside the “black box” of ab-initio simulation. Synopsis • Motivation • The rise of quantum-mechanical simulations. Some ab initio codes Wavefunction-based theory • Density-functional theory (DFT) Quantum-mechanical • approaches Quantum theory in periodic boundaries • Plane-wave and other basis sets Density Functional • Theory SCF solvers • Molecular Dynamics Electronic Structure of Condensed Phases Recommended Reading and Further Study Total-energy calculations • Basis sets Jorge Kohanoff Electronic Structure Calculations for Solids and Molecules, Plane-waves and Theory and Computational Methods, Cambridge, ISBN-13: 9780521815918 Pseudopotentials • Dominik Marx, J¨urg Hutter Ab Initio Molecular Dynamics: Basic Theory and How to solve the Advanced Methods Cambridge University Press, ISBN: 0521898633 equations • Richard M. Martin Electronic Structure: Basic Theory and Practical Methods: Basic Theory and Practical Density Functional Approaches Vol 1 Cambridge University Press, ISBN: 0521782856
    [Show full text]
  • Pyscf: the Python-Based Simulations of Chemistry Framework
    PySCF: The Python-based Simulations of Chemistry Framework Qiming Sun∗1, Timothy C. Berkelbach2, Nick S. Blunt3,4, George H. Booth5, Sheng Guo1,6, Zhendong Li1, Junzi Liu7, James D. McClain1,6, Elvira R. Sayfutyarova1,6, Sandeep Sharma8, Sebastian Wouters9, and Garnet Kin-Lic Chany1 1Division of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena CA 91125, USA 2Department of Chemistry and James Franck Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637, USA 3Chemical Science Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California 94720, USA 4Department of Chemistry, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720, USA 5Department of Physics, King's College London, Strand, London WC2R 2LS, United Kingdom 6Department of Chemistry, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08544, USA 7Institute of Chemistry Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, P. R. China 8Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO 80302, USA 9Brantsandpatents, Pauline van Pottelsberghelaan 24, 9051 Sint-Denijs-Westrem, Belgium arXiv:1701.08223v2 [physics.chem-ph] 2 Mar 2017 Abstract PySCF is a general-purpose electronic structure platform designed from the ground up to emphasize code simplicity, so as to facilitate new method development and enable flexible ∗[email protected] [email protected] 1 computational workflows. The package provides a wide range of tools to support simulations of finite-size systems, extended systems with periodic boundary conditions, low-dimensional periodic systems, and custom Hamiltonians, using mean-field and post-mean-field methods with standard Gaussian basis functions. To ensure ease of extensibility, PySCF uses the Python language to implement almost all of its features, while computationally critical paths are implemented with heavily optimized C routines.
    [Show full text]
  • Powerpoint Presentation
    Session 2 Basis Sets CCCE 2008 1 Session 2: Basis Sets • Two of the major methods (ab initio and DFT) require some understanding of basis sets and basis functions • This session describes the essentials of basis sets: – What they are – How they are constructed – How they are used – Significance in choice CCCE 2008 2 Running a Calculation • In performing ab initio and DFT computa- tional chemistry calculations, the chemist has to make several decisions of input to the code: – The molecular geometry (and spin state) – The basis set used to determine the wavefunction – The properties to be calculated – The type(s) of calculations and any accompanying assumptions CCCE 2008 3 Running a calculation • For ab initio or DFT calculations, many programs require a basis set choice to be made – The basis set is an approx- imate representation of the atomic orbitals (AOs) – The program then calculates molecular orbitals (MOs) using the Linear Combin- ation of Atomic Orbitals (LCAO) approximation CCCE 2008 4 Computational Chemistry Map Chemist Decides: Computer calculates: Starting Molecular AOs determine the Geometry AOs O wavefunction (ψ) Basis Set (with H H ab initio and DFT) Type of Calculation LCAO (Method and Assumptions) O Properties to HH be Calculated MOs CCCE 2008 5 Critical Choices • Choice of the method (and basis set) used is critical • Which method? • Molecular Mechanics, Ab initio, Semiempirical, or DFT • Which approximation? • MM2, MM3, HF, AM1, PM3, or B3LYP, etc. • Which basis set (if applicable)? • Minimal basis set • Split-valence
    [Show full text]
  • Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Recent Work
    Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Recent Work Title From NWChem to NWChemEx: Evolving with the Computational Chemistry Landscape. Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4sm897jh Journal Chemical reviews, 121(8) ISSN 0009-2665 Authors Kowalski, Karol Bair, Raymond Bauman, Nicholas P et al. Publication Date 2021-04-01 DOI 10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c00998 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California From NWChem to NWChemEx: Evolving with the computational chemistry landscape Karol Kowalski,y Raymond Bair,z Nicholas P. Bauman,y Jeffery S. Boschen,{ Eric J. Bylaska,y Jeff Daily,y Wibe A. de Jong,x Thom Dunning, Jr,y Niranjan Govind,y Robert J. Harrison,k Murat Keçeli,z Kristopher Keipert,? Sriram Krishnamoorthy,y Suraj Kumar,y Erdal Mutlu,y Bruce Palmer,y Ajay Panyala,y Bo Peng,y Ryan M. Richard,{ T. P. Straatsma,# Peter Sushko,y Edward F. Valeev,@ Marat Valiev,y Hubertus J. J. van Dam,4 Jonathan M. Waldrop,{ David B. Williams-Young,x Chao Yang,x Marcin Zalewski,y and Theresa L. Windus*,r yPacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA 99352 zArgonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL 60439 {Ames Laboratory, Ames, IA 50011 xLawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, 94720 kInstitute for Advanced Computational Science, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY 11794 ?NVIDIA Inc, previously Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL 60439 #National Center for Computational Sciences, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6373 @Department of Chemistry, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061 4Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973 rDepartment of Chemistry, Iowa State University and Ames Laboratory, Ames, IA 50011 E-mail: [email protected] 1 Abstract Since the advent of the first computers, chemists have been at the forefront of using computers to understand and solve complex chemical problems.
    [Show full text]
  • Towards Efficient Data Exchange and Sharing for Big-Data Driven Materials Science: Metadata and Data Formats
    www.nature.com/npjcompumats PERSPECTIVE OPEN Towards efficient data exchange and sharing for big-data driven materials science: metadata and data formats Luca M. Ghiringhelli1, Christian Carbogno1, Sergey Levchenko1, Fawzi Mohamed1, Georg Huhs2,3, Martin Lüders4, Micael Oliveira5,6 and Matthias Scheffler1,7 With big-data driven materials research, the new paradigm of materials science, sharing and wide accessibility of data are becoming crucial aspects. Obviously, a prerequisite for data exchange and big-data analytics is standardization, which means using consistent and unique conventions for, e.g., units, zero base lines, and file formats. There are two main strategies to achieve this goal. One accepts the heterogeneous nature of the community, which comprises scientists from physics, chemistry, bio-physics, and materials science, by complying with the diverse ecosystem of computer codes and thus develops “converters” for the input and output files of all important codes. These converters then translate the data of each code into a standardized, code- independent format. The other strategy is to provide standardized open libraries that code developers can adopt for shaping their inputs, outputs, and restart files, directly into the same code-independent format. In this perspective paper, we present both strategies and argue that they can and should be regarded as complementary, if not even synergetic. The represented appropriate format and conventions were agreed upon by two teams, the Electronic Structure Library (ESL) of the European Center for Atomic and Molecular Computations (CECAM) and the NOvel MAterials Discovery (NOMAD) Laboratory, a European Centre of Excellence (CoE). A key element of this work is the definition of hierarchical metadata describing state-of-the-art electronic-structure calculations.
    [Show full text]
  • APW+Lo Basis Sets
    Computer Physics Communications 179 (2008) 784–790 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Computer Physics Communications www.elsevier.com/locate/cpc Force calculation for orbital-dependent potentials with FP-(L)APW + lo basis sets ∗ Fabien Tran a, , Jan Kuneš b,c, Pavel Novák c,PeterBlahaa,LaurenceD.Marksd, Karlheinz Schwarz a a Institute of Materials Chemistry, Vienna University of Technology, Getreidemarkt 9/165-TC, A-1060 Vienna, Austria b Theoretical Physics III, Center for Electronic Correlations and Magnetism, Institute of Physics, University of Augsburg, Augsburg 86135, Germany c Institute of Physics, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Cukrovarnická 10, CZ-162 53 Prague 6, Czech Republic d Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208, USA article info abstract Article history: Within the linearized augmented plane-wave method for electronic structure calculations, a force Received 8 April 2008 expression was derived for such exchange–correlation energy functionals that lead to orbital-dependent Received in revised form 14 May 2008 potentials (e.g., LDA + U or hybrid methods). The forces were implemented into the WIEN2k code and Accepted 27 June 2008 were tested on systems containing strongly correlated d and f electrons. The results show that the Availableonline5July2008 expression leads to accurate atomic forces. © PACS: 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. 61.50.-f 71.15.Mb 71.27.+a Keywords: Computational materials science Density functional theory Forces Structure optimization Strongly correlated materials 1. Introduction The majority of present day electronic structure calculations on periodic solids are performed with the Kohn–Sham (KS) formulation [1] of density functional theory [2] using the local density (LDA) or generalized gradient approximations (GGA) for the exchange–correlation energy.
    [Show full text]
  • Virt&L-Comm.3.2012.1
    Virt&l-Comm.3.2012.1 A MODERN APPROACH TO AB INITIO COMPUTING IN CHEMISTRY, MOLECULAR AND MATERIALS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGIES ANTONIO LAGANA’, DEPARTMENT OF CHEMISTRY, UNIVERSITY OF PERUGIA, PERUGIA (IT)* ABSTRACT In this document we examine the present situation of Ab initio computing in Chemistry and Molecular and Materials Science and Technologies applications. To this end we give a short survey of the most popular quantum chemistry and quantum (as well as classical and semiclassical) molecular dynamics programs and packages. We then examine the need to move to higher complexity multiscale computational applications and the related need to adopt for them on the platform side cloud and grid computing. On this ground we examine also the need for reorganizing. The design of a possible roadmap to establishing a Chemistry Virtual Research Community is then sketched and some examples of Chemistry and Molecular and Materials Science and Technologies prototype applications exploiting the synergy between competences and distributed platforms are illustrated for these applications the middleware and work habits into cooperative schemes and virtual research communities (part of the first draft of this paper has been incorporated in the white paper issued by the Computational Chemistry Division of EUCHEMS in August 2012) INTRODUCTION The computational chemistry (CC) community is made of individuals (academics, affiliated to research institutions and operators of chemistry related companies) carrying out computational research in Chemistry, Molecular and Materials Science and Technology (CMMST). It is to a large extent registered into the CC division (DCC) of the European Chemistry and Molecular Science (EUCHEMS) Society and is connected to other chemistry related organizations operating in Chemical Engineering, Biochemistry, Chemometrics, Omics-sciences, Medicinal chemistry, Forensic chemistry, Food chemistry, etc.
    [Show full text]