Slawomir Janicki
slawomir.janicki@comcast.net
I was comparing analytical and numeric methods for hessian runs, and I found that in one case the numeric methods produced negative frequencies:
geometry optimization run:
$STATPT NSTEP=500 HSSEND=.F. TRMIN=0.01 METHOD=GDIIS NOREG=5
OPTTOL=0.0000001 $END
hessian runs:
analytical:
$FORCE METHOD=ANALYTIC PROJCT=.TRUE. VIBANL=.TRUE. PRTSCN=.TRUE. SCLFAC=1 $END
gave:
1 2 3 4 5
FREQUENCY: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
and
FREQUENCY ENTROPY %-CONTRIBUTION
--------- ------- --------------
237.43 1.822 26.50
237.43 1.822 26.50
268.28 1.607 23.38
544.38 0.556 8.09
numeric 1 step:
$FORCE PROJCT=.TRUE. VIBANL=.TRUE. PRTSCN=.TRUE. SCLFAC=1 METHOD=NUMERIC
NVIB=1 $END
gave:
1 2 3 4 5
FREQUENCY: 14.32 I 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
and
FREQUENCY ENTROPY %-CONTRIBUTION
--------- ------- --------------
207.78 2.063 29.17
212.70 2.020 28.56
355.72 1.141 16.13
355.99 1.140 16.11
numeric 2 step:
$FORCE PROJCT=.TRUE. VIBANL=.TRUE. PRTSCN=.TRUE. SCLFAC=1 NVIB=2
METHOD=NUMERIC $END
gave:
1 2 3 4 5
FREQUENCY: 14.14 I 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
and
FREQUENCY ENTROPY %-CONTRIBUTION
--------- ------- --------------
202.41 2.111 29.15
202.51 2.110 29.13
352.25 1.156 15.96
352.31 1.156 15.96
Is there a way to avoid this? I need to rely on numeric requencies when I can't use analytical hessian.
Slawomir