Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Example on shc_alpha, beta, gamma is confusing #3

Open
jaemolihm opened this issue May 29, 2021 · 2 comments
Open

Example on shc_alpha, beta, gamma is confusing #3

jaemolihm opened this issue May 29, 2021 · 2 comments

Comments

@jaemolihm
Copy link
Member

jaemolihm commented May 29, 2021

https://github.com/wannier-berri/wannier-berri-org/blob/master/source/exampleFe.rst#spin-hall-conductivity
says that "However, specification of shc_alpha, shc_beta, and shc_gamma does not work with symmetry.", but the code block below uses symmetry with shc_alpha.

It would be better to add two examples, one with symmetry and without shc_alpha, the other without symmetry and with shc_alpha.

Or am I misunderstanding something?

@manxkim

@stepan-tsirkin
Copy link
Member

We had a discussion, and @manxkim was convincing me that when shc_* are used, the result works as a scalar, and use of symmetry is justified. However I was still not convienced, because if you take a forbidden component, and integrate over an irreducible wedge, you will get smth nonzzero. Then, multiplication by a number of irreducible wedges gives also non-vanishing result, which is incorrect. I think shc_* works only for some specific cases, like the xyz component for a cubic system. But I am still not sure. @manxkim, @jaemolihm , do you have something to add to this discussion?

@manxkim
Copy link
Member

manxkim commented Jun 1, 2021 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants