segment fault error in EPW 6.0 but not in 5.9

Post here questions linked with issue while running the EPW code

Moderator: stiwari

Post Reply
tyj
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2025 1:50 pm
Affiliation: Rutgers University

segment fault error in EPW 6.0 but not in 5.9

Post by tyj »

Dear developer,
My job was finished with QE-7.3.1 and EPW 5.9 without error. Now I want to rerun the same job and test the new features in v6.0, ran with QE-v7.5, but it reports 'segmentation fault' error when I run it. Is there some change in the new version that causes this? The input/outputs of these two versions are attached below.

Best,
Yujia
Attachments
v6.0.zip
(195.33 KiB) Downloaded 39 times
v5.9.zip
(188.82 KiB) Downloaded 36 times
stiwari
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2023 9:48 pm
Affiliation: UT Austin

Re: segment fault error in EPW 6.0 but not in 5.9

Post by stiwari »

Hello Yujia,

Did you run everything including phonon calculations using QE7.5 or you reused the output from QE7.3? I did not see a phonon calculation in your v6.0 folder.

Best regards,
Sabya.
tyj
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2025 1:50 pm
Affiliation: Rutgers University

Re: segment fault error in EPW 6.0 but not in 5.9

Post by tyj »

Dear Sabya,
I just reused the results from QE7.3 with EPW6.0 in my original attached file. The phonon calculation was done but I didn't attach it.

To avoid possible version incompatibility problem, I redid all the calculation with QE7.5 and EPW6.0, but the same error is still here. I attach the files of both phonon and epw calculation below. There're still plenty of free memory on the node, so it's strange that it reports segmentation fault error.

Best,
Yujia
Attachments
epw 6.0 input.zip
(220.33 KiB) Downloaded 31 times
stiwari
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2023 9:48 pm
Affiliation: UT Austin

Re: segment fault error in EPW 6.0 but not in 5.9

Post by stiwari »

Hello Yujia,

I see, you are using PAW pseudopotential; Can you use ONCV/NC pseudopotential instead of PAW?

Best,
Sabya.
tyj
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2025 1:50 pm
Affiliation: Rutgers University

Re: segment fault error in EPW 6.0 but not in 5.9

Post by tyj »

Hi Sabya,
I changed two of my elements to ONCV, but one is still PAW, because I didn't find fully-relativistic ONCV/NC potential for rare-earth element. This is same as my original attached file. I redid the calculation and still doesn't work. I also tried USPP potential and has same problem with PAW (Not sure why I can't attach extra file during edit).

To check NC potential, I ran Pb wSOC example which uses NC pseudopotential, and it works.

So looks like EPW6.0 doesn't support PAW and USPP pseudopotential which caused the problem I have, but previous version like EPW5.8.1 supports? (The attachment epw 5.8 is the same input/ouput I attached at first).

I mainly want to use the q-point parallelization feature in v6.0, which could speed up the calculation a lot. Other results should be same. So in my case, where there's no NC/ONCV pseudopotential for rare-earth element, is there a way to use EPW6.0 or I can only use the previous versions?

Best,
Yujia
Attachments
epw 5.8.zip
(188.46 KiB) Downloaded 25 times
example-pb.zip
(31.16 KiB) Downloaded 24 times
my material.zip
(204.79 KiB) Downloaded 32 times
Last edited by tyj on Tue Jan 06, 2026 3:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
stiwari
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2023 9:48 pm
Affiliation: UT Austin

Re: segment fault error in EPW 6.0 but not in 5.9

Post by stiwari »

Hi Yujia,

Yes, I have taken a look and there is an issue in EPW v6.0 regarding PAW pseudos. If EPW 5.8.1 works fine, you can perform step 1 with EPW v5.8.1 and generate the epmatwp files (electron-phonon matrix in Wannier representation). You then use the EPW v6.0 for the fine-grid calculations (enabling q-parallelization).

Let us know if this route gives you any problem.

Best,
Sabya.
tyj
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2025 1:50 pm
Affiliation: Rutgers University

Re: segment fault error in EPW 6.0 but not in 5.9

Post by tyj »

Dear Sabya,
Thanks very much for the help. I'm glad to know that we can use an earlier version in step 1 and v6.0 for fine-grid calculations. I would try that, and hopefully it works.

Best,
Yujia
Post Reply