When outputting a DMR sparse format matrix, the ordering definition in R differs from that in HR. #5741
Labels
Feature Discussed
The features will be discussed first but will not be implemented soon
Input&Output
Suitable for coders without knowing too many DFT details
Background
The difference lies in the logic of the output section. For HR, the order of the list used to construct R has no relation to the order of neighboring atoms. For DMR, the order of R's list corresponds to the order of atom pairs.
Review the output section code: the logic for HR, SR, TR, rR, and dHR is the same and does not have an impact. Only the DMR logic differs and can cause an impact.
The output method of HR may result in matrices with R zeros, while DMR will not.
The code that defines the order of R:
HR: source/module_hamilt_lcao/hamilt_lcaodft/spar_dh.cpp void sparse_format::set_R_range
DMR: source/module_hamilt_lcao/module_hcontainer/hcontainer.cpp size_t HContainer::size_R_loop() const
Describe the solution you'd like
Leave it for further discussion.
Task list only for developers
Notice Possible Changes of Behavior (Reminder only for developers)
No response
Notice any changes of core modules (Reminder only for developers)
No response
Notice Possible Changes of Core Modules (Reminder only for developers)
No response
Additional Context
No response
Task list for Issue attackers (only for developers)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: