A benchmark for materials simulation

Material properties can now be predicted reliably from first-principles calculations [Also see Research Article by Lejaeghere et al.] Density functional theory (DFT) stands out from all first-principles quantum mechanical methods for the simulation of materials, as it enables very good approximations for the complicated components of electronic motion called exchange and correlation. DFT is the method of choice for many materials simulations because of the availability of general-purpose programs that can perform calculations on any material. Results obtained with one DFT program need to be reproducible by any of the other DFT programs, and this has not been straightforward up to now. On page 10.1126/science.aad3000 of this issue, Lejaeghere et al. (1) describe an extensive effort by developers of the major solid-state DFT codes to provide a unified and reproducible benchmark of precision for their calculations based on a reliable criterion, the so-called Δ gauge. Using the Δ gauge, the authors found that the level of precision that can be achieved today in DFT calculations of elemental crystalline solids is comparable to the precision of the most advanced techniques for experimental measurement of the properties of materials. The work leads to the conclusion that the DFT simulation of elemental crystalline solids is a (computationally) solved problem, but also poses the question of whether we can achieve the same levels of validation and reproducibility for more complex simulations of materials involving several elements and/or several methods.

[1]  J. Junquera,et al.  Critical thickness for ferroelectricity in perovskite ultrathin films , 2003, Nature.

[2]  Walter Kohn,et al.  Nobel Lecture: Electronic structure of matter-wave functions and density functionals , 1999 .

[3]  W. Kohn,et al.  Self-Consistent Equations Including Exchange and Correlation Effects , 1965 .

[4]  P. Carloni,et al.  Computational metallomics of the anticancer drug cisplatin. , 2015, Journal of inorganic biochemistry.

[5]  Chris J Pickard,et al.  Prediction of 10-fold coordinated TiO2 and SiO2 structures at multimegabar pressures , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[6]  Thomas Bligaard,et al.  Density functional theory in surface chemistry and catalysis , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  M. Levitt,et al.  Theoretical studies of enzymic reactions: dielectric, electrostatic and steric stabilization of the carbonium ion in the reaction of lysozyme. , 1976, Journal of molecular biology.

[8]  Paul Messina,et al.  Quantum Molecular Dynamics in the Post-Petaflops Era , 2015, Computer.

[9]  Narbe Mardirossian,et al.  Exploring the limit of accuracy for density functionals based on the generalized gradient approximation: local, global hybrid, and range-separated hybrid functionals with and without dispersion corrections. , 2014, The Journal of chemical physics.

[10]  Stefano de Gironcoli,et al.  Reproducibility in density functional theory calculations of solids , 2016, Science.

[11]  D. Bowler,et al.  O(N) methods in electronic structure calculations. , 2011, Reports on progress in physics. Physical Society.

[12]  Jacek Dziedzic,et al.  Density functional theory calculations on entire proteins for free energies of binding: Application to a model polar binding site , 2014, Proteins.

[13]  T. Arias,et al.  Iterative minimization techniques for ab initio total energy calculations: molecular dynamics and co , 1992 .