two "a2f" files
Posted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 10:30 am
Dear EPW developers and EPW experts,
I notice that in EPW, there are two different ways implemented to calculate "a2f" function.
One is to set "eliashberg = .true." and "liso = .false. & laniso = .false.". The subroutine evaluate_a2f_lambda generates a "PREFIX.a2f" file.
The other is to set "a2f = .true.". The subroutine selfen_phon_q calculates all \lambda_qv and then subroutine eliashberg_a2f generates a "PREFIX.a2f.01" file.
Are these two "a2f" files supposed to be identical? From my simple test, they look different (probably something is wrong in my calculations).
More importantly, I implemented band-resolved a2f functions following the two methods (by fixing ibnd and jbnd). The band-resolved a2f functions calculated from the above two methods are very different (for the same ibnd and jbnd).
Which method shall I use to implement band-resolved a2f file? Or the two methods should be identical and there are some bugs in my implementation?
Thank you very much for your help.
Dr. Hanghui Chen
Department of Physics
New York University Shanghai and New York University
I notice that in EPW, there are two different ways implemented to calculate "a2f" function.
One is to set "eliashberg = .true." and "liso = .false. & laniso = .false.". The subroutine evaluate_a2f_lambda generates a "PREFIX.a2f" file.
The other is to set "a2f = .true.". The subroutine selfen_phon_q calculates all \lambda_qv and then subroutine eliashberg_a2f generates a "PREFIX.a2f.01" file.
Are these two "a2f" files supposed to be identical? From my simple test, they look different (probably something is wrong in my calculations).
More importantly, I implemented band-resolved a2f functions following the two methods (by fixing ibnd and jbnd). The band-resolved a2f functions calculated from the above two methods are very different (for the same ibnd and jbnd).
Which method shall I use to implement band-resolved a2f file? Or the two methods should be identical and there are some bugs in my implementation?
Thank you very much for your help.
Dr. Hanghui Chen
Department of Physics
New York University Shanghai and New York University