% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@MISC{Bosoni:1008353,
author = {Bosoni, Emanuele and Beal, Louis and Bercx, Marnik and
Blaha, Peter and Blügel, Stefan and Broeder, Jens and
Callsen, Martin and Cottenier, Stefaan and Degomme, Augustin
and Dikan, Vladimir and Eimre, Kristjan and Flage-Larsen,
Espen and Fornari, Marco and Garcia, Alberto and Genovese,
Luigi and Giantomassi, Matteo and Huber, Sebastiaan P. and
Janssen, Henning and Kastlunger, Georg and Krack, Matthias
and Kresse, Georg and Kühne, Thomas D. and Lejaeghere, Kurt
and Madsen, Georg K. H. and Marsman, Martijn and Marzari,
Nicola and Michalicek, Gregor and Mirhosseini, Hossein and
Müller, Tiziano M. A. and Petretto, Guido and Pickard,
Chris J. and Poncé, Samuel and Rignanese, Gian-Marco and
Rubel, Oleg and Ruh, Thomas and Sluydts, Michael and
Vanpoucke, Danny E. P. and Vijay, Sudarshan and Wolloch,
Michael and Wortmann, Daniel and Yakutovich, Aliaksandr V.
and Yu, Jusong and Zadoks, Austin and Zhu, Bonan and Pizzi,
Giovanni},
title = {{H}ow to verify the precision of density-functional-theory
implementations via reproducible and universal workflows},
publisher = {Materials Cloud},
reportid = {FZJ-2023-02299},
year = {2023},
abstract = {In the past decades many density-functional theory methods
and codes adopting periodic boundary conditions have been
developed and are now extensively used in condensed matter
physics and materials science research. Only in 2016,
however, their precision (i.e., to which extent properties
computed with different codes agree among each other) was
systematically assessed on elemental crystals: a first
crucial step to evaluate the reliability of such
computations. We discuss here general recommendations for
verification studies aiming at further testing precision and
transferability of density-functional-theory computational
approaches and codes. We illustrate such recommendations
using a greatly expanded protocol covering the whole
periodic table from Z=1 to 96 and characterizing 10
prototypical cubic compounds for each element: 4 unaries and
6 oxides, spanning a wide range of coordination numbers and
oxidation states. The primary outcome is a reference dataset
of 960 equations of state cross-checked between two
all-electron codes, then used to verify and improve nine
pseudopotential-based approaches. Such effort is facilitated
by deploying AiiDA common workflows that perform automatic
input parameter selection, provide identical input/output
interfaces across codes, and ensure full reproducibility.
Finally, we discuss the extent to which the current results
for total energies can be reused for different goals (e.g.,
obtaining formation energies). This data entry contains all
data to reproduce the results, as well as the resulting
curated all-electron dataset and the scripts to generate the
figures of the paper.},
keywords = {DFT (Other) / verification (Other) / pseudopotentials
(Other) / automation (Other) / equation of state (Other) /
MARVEL/P3 (Other)},
cin = {IAS-1 / PGI-1 / JARA-FIT / JARA-HPC / IAS-9},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)IAS-1-20090406 / I:(DE-Juel1)PGI-1-20110106 /
$I:(DE-82)080009_20140620$ / $I:(DE-82)080012_20140620$ /
I:(DE-Juel1)IAS-9-20201008},
pnm = {5211 - Topological Matter (POF4-521)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5211},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)32},
doi = {10.24435/MATERIALSCLOUD:S4-3H},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1008353},
}