Errors in total charge integral
Posted: Sat Mar 26, 2011 4:09 pm
Hi! I have been wondering about the limitations of this method in terms of its precision with charges on individual atoms. I have been running on a little test system of a water + a halogen, and generating cube files for Bader input. I made a plot just now of grid spacing versus error in the total charge and find that it won't converge closer than 0.02 e, but just bounces around.
For all I know that's a very good and small error to have so I won't blow it out of proportion. I'm wondering if anyone could share their experience with the size of errors one can expect and also how this might depend on system size and nature of the atoms. I removed the core states because that clearly is going to be a source of error in the denser regions. This improved the error immensely. But should I expect to see more fluctuation in it as I scale the system up....if the point density is the same I would think not.
Is it routine for people to report numbers from this code to more than, say, 1 or 2 decimal places? Really 2 would be ample for me....
Also are there better ways of generating these grids that might helps this problem? Cubegen like all black box codes can be pretty frustrating.
What sparked this fixation on the error really was that I found a deprecated piece of code in gaussian that calculates AIM charges with errors no bigger than 2*10^-3 e. Of course your code is WAY more robust and theirs errors out at a very low number of critical points. Am I just new to grid methods and these things come with them? I'll stop now and maybe continue some conversation later. Thanks for your time and the code!
For all I know that's a very good and small error to have so I won't blow it out of proportion. I'm wondering if anyone could share their experience with the size of errors one can expect and also how this might depend on system size and nature of the atoms. I removed the core states because that clearly is going to be a source of error in the denser regions. This improved the error immensely. But should I expect to see more fluctuation in it as I scale the system up....if the point density is the same I would think not.
Is it routine for people to report numbers from this code to more than, say, 1 or 2 decimal places? Really 2 would be ample for me....
Also are there better ways of generating these grids that might helps this problem? Cubegen like all black box codes can be pretty frustrating.
What sparked this fixation on the error really was that I found a deprecated piece of code in gaussian that calculates AIM charges with errors no bigger than 2*10^-3 e. Of course your code is WAY more robust and theirs errors out at a very low number of critical points. Am I just new to grid methods and these things come with them? I'll stop now and maybe continue some conversation later. Thanks for your time and the code!