Author
Listed:
- Aldo H. Romero
(West Virginia University)
- Matthieu J. Verstraete
(European Theoretical Spectroscopy Facility and Nanomat/Q-MAT/CESAM, Université de Liège)
Abstract
Magnetic systems represent an important challenge for electronic structure methods, in particular Density Functional Theory (DFT), which uses a single determinant wavefunction. To assess the predictions obtained by DFT in this type of materials, we benchmark different exchange correlation functionals with respect to each other, and with respect to available experimental data, on two families of binary iron alloys which are metallic and magnetic. We climb three rungs in Jacob’s ladder of DFT (i) the local density approximation, (ii) the industry standard approximation due to Perdew, Burke and Ernzerhof, and the revised version for solids, PBEsol (iii) and finally a very accurate meta-GGA functional SCAN, which corresponds to the third rung. More than 350 structures in ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic configurations were considered. We compare the Convex Hull, the calculated magnetic moment, crystal structure, formation energy and electronic gap if present. We conclude that none of the functionals work in all conditions: whereas PBE and PBEsol can give a fair description of the crystal structure and the energetics, SCAN strongly overestimates the formation energy – giving values which are at least twice as large as PBE (and experiment). Magnetic moments are better predicted by PBE as well. Our results show that magnetic and strongly correlated materials are a tough litmus test for DFT, and that they represent the next frontier in the development of a truly universal exchange correlation functionals.
Suggested Citation
Aldo H. Romero & Matthieu J. Verstraete, 2018.
"From one to three, exploring the rungs of Jacob’s ladder in magnetic alloys,"
The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 91(8), pages 1-10, August.
Handle:
RePEc:spr:eurphb:v:91:y:2018:i:8:d:10.1140_epjb_e2018-90275-5
DOI: 10.1140/epjb/e2018-90275-5
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:eurphb:v:91:y:2018:i:8:d:10.1140_epjb_e2018-90275-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.