Fermi surface geometry and momentum dependent electron-phonon coupling drive the charge density wave in quasi-1D ZrTe$3$

Josu Diego; Matteo Calandra

arxiv: 2602.04534 · v2 · submitted 2026-02-04 · ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci · cond-mat.str-el

Fermi surface geometry and momentum dependent electron-phonon coupling drive the charge density wave in quasi-1D ZrTe3

Josu Diego , Matteo Calandra This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 07:41 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci cond-mat.str-el

keywords charge density waveZrTe3electron-phonon couplingFermi surfaceKohn anomalyquasi-one-dimensionaldensity functional theoryHubbard interaction

0 comments

The pith

Fermi surface geometry cooperates with momentum-dependent electron-phonon coupling to drive the charge density wave in ZrTe₃, with coupling variations dominant.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

First-principles calculations of ZrTe₃ in its high-symmetry phase require including Hubbard interactions on the tellurium 5p orbitals to correctly reproduce the Fermi surface. This inclusion is also necessary to produce a soft harmonic phonon mode exactly at the wavevector of the observed charge density wave. Analysis of the electron-phonon coupling shows that its strong dependence on phonon momentum outweighs the contributions from the Fermi surface geometry alone. The calculations further identify the atomic displacements in the low-symmetry phase as a nonchiral modulation. These mechanisms are expected to operate in other quasi-one-dimensional materials with similar chain structures.

Core claim

Our first principles calculations in the high-symmetry phase show that the Fermi surface is correctly reproduced only when the Hubbard interaction on the Te 5p orbitals is included, which in turn is essential for the appearance of a soft harmonic phonon mode at the CDW wavevector. Analyzing the mode and momentum dependence of the electron-phonon coupling, we find that its variations with phonon momentum dominate over electronic effects. These results identify unambiguously the CDW origin in ZrTe₃ as a cooperative effect of Fermi surface geometry and momentum-dependent electron-phonon coupling, with the latter playing the leading role. We further determine the atomic structure in the low-symm

What carries the argument

The momentum-dependent electron-phonon coupling matrix elements that vary strongly with phonon momentum and, together with the Fermi surface geometry, produce the soft mode at the CDW wavevector.

If this is right

The low-symmetry phase has a nonchiral atomic modulation.
The mechanism extends to other quasi-1D trichalcogenides and Peierls-like systems.
Hubbard U on Te 5p orbitals is essential for reproducing the instability.
Momentum variation in electron-phonon coupling leads over pure Fermi surface nesting.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Ignoring momentum dependence of the coupling may fail to predict CDWs in related low-dimensional materials.
The nonchiral structure could affect electronic properties like resistivity in the CDW state.
Strain or chemical substitution could be used to tune the transition temperature by modifying the coupling or surface.
This highlights the need for momentum-resolved calculations in studying lattice instabilities.

Load-bearing premise

Including the Hubbard interaction on the Te 5p orbitals is essential for reproducing the correct Fermi surface and for the appearance of the soft harmonic phonon mode at the CDW wavevector.

What would settle it

If the calculated electron-phonon coupling shows no strong momentum dependence peaking at the CDW wavevector, or if experiments find the soft mode even without the correct Fermi surface features, the claim that coupling variations play the leading role would be falsified.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.04534 by Josu Diego, Matteo Calandra.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Crystal structure of ZrTe3 viewed along the baxis. The unit cell is outlined with black lines, while shaded areas inside indicate the Zr-centered prisms along b. Te(2) and Te(3) atoms forming the secondary chain along a are highlighted. Alternating intraprismatic (∆Intra) and interprismatic (∆Inter) distances along this dimerized chain are listed in Table I. real part of the electronic susceptibility [17… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Fermi surface of ZrTe3 at kz = 0. The background color map shows the experimental ARPES intensity from Ref. [13]. Black arrows, drawn in that study, indicate the qx component of the CDW vector. Cyan lines represent the theoretical FS from Ref. [11]. Our calculated FS cross sections are overlaid for comparison: (a) PBE (red), (b) PBE+SOC (purple), and (c) PBE+U applied to the Te atoms (dark blue). where ϵnk… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Quantities related to the non-interacting static electronic susceptibility at different levels of theory (PBE: red; [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: shows the harmonic dispersion of the acoustic phonon branches along the (h, 0, 1/3) direction for h ∈ [0, 0.10], comparing the results for PBE (red lines) and PBE+U (blue lines). Within PBE no imaginary phonon frequency is observed, and the system remains dynamically stable (also when including SOC, not shown). In contrast, once the on-site correlation effects between the Te 5p orbitals are included, the … view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Harmonic phonon spectra and electron-phonon interaction of calculated with PBE+U. (a) Acoustic phonon spectra [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

ZrTe$_3$ is a prototypical quasi-one-dimensional compound undergoing a charge density wave transition via a very sharp Kohn anomaly in phonon momentum space. While Fermi surface geometry has long been considered the primary driver of the instability, a full understanding of the lattice dynamics and electron-phonon role has remained elusive. Our first principles calculations in the high-symmetry phase show that the Fermi surface is correctly reproduced only when the Hubbard interaction on the Te $5p$ orbitals is included, which in turn is essential for the appearance of a soft harmonic phonon mode at the CDW wavevector. Analyzing the mode and momentum dependence of the electron-phonon coupling, we find that its variations with phonon momentum dominate over electronic effects. These results identify unambiguously the CDW origin in ZrTe$_3$ as a cooperative effect of Fermi surface geometry and momentum-dependent electron-phonon coupling, with the latter playing the leading role. We further determine the atomic structure in the low-symmetry CDW phase, revealing a nonchiral modulation. The mechanisms revealed in our work are directly relevant to other quasi-1D systems, including trichalcogenides and compounds hosting Peierls-like chains.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

ZrTe3 CDW driven mainly by momentum-dependent e-ph coupling on top of FS geometry, but only after Hubbard U on Te 5p fixes the bands.

read the letter

The punchline is that ZrTe3's charge density wave comes from Fermi surface geometry working together with momentum-dependent electron-phonon coupling, and the calculations point to the e-ph variation as the stronger driver once the right band structure is in place. What the paper does well is to show explicitly that the Fermi surface only matches experiment when Hubbard U is added to the Te 5p orbitals, and that this same choice produces the soft harmonic phonon at the CDW wavevector. They then look at how the electron-phonon coupling strength changes with phonon momentum and mode, and find that this q-dependence beats out the electronic nesting contribution. That gives a clearer picture than just saying the FS geometry is responsible. They also compute the atomic displacements in the CDW phase and get a nonchiral pattern, which is a useful concrete result. The main soft spot is the role of the Hubbard U parameter. It is tuned to fix the Fermi surface, and that same tuning is required for the phonon softening. This makes it hard to tell how much of the momentum-dependent coupling is a genuine prediction versus something that follows from the adjusted band structure. If the e-ph matrix elements shift with U in a way that amplifies the q-variation, the claim that e-ph dominates could be less general than it appears. The abstract does not discuss how the results change with different U values or without it. This work is aimed at researchers studying CDW mechanisms in quasi-one-dimensional materials like the trichalcogenides. Someone who wants to see a detailed breakdown of e-ph versus nesting in a real system will find the analysis useful. The calculations are first-principles based and address a specific material, so it is worth sending out for peer review to let experts check the technical details and the robustness to the U choice.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports first-principles calculations on ZrTe₃ showing that the experimental Fermi surface is reproduced only when a Hubbard U interaction is included on the Te 5p orbitals. This same inclusion is required to obtain a soft harmonic phonon mode at the CDW wavevector. Analysis of the momentum and mode dependence of the electron-phonon coupling matrix elements indicates that their q-variation dominates over electronic nesting effects, leading to the conclusion that the CDW arises from a cooperative interplay of Fermi surface geometry and momentum-dependent e-ph coupling, with the latter playing the leading role. The atomic displacements in the low-symmetry CDW phase are also determined and shown to be nonchiral.

Significance. If the separation between Fermi-surface geometry and momentum-dependent e-ph coupling can be established robustly, the work would provide a clear microscopic mechanism for the sharp Kohn anomaly in this prototypical quasi-1D CDW system and offer a transferable framework for other trichalcogenides and Peierls-chain compounds. The explicit determination of the CDW-phase atomic structure supplies a concrete, testable prediction.

major comments (1)

[Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that momentum-dependent e-ph coupling dominates rests on the Hubbard U parameter on Te 5p orbitals being required both to match the experimental Fermi surface and to produce the soft mode at q_CDW. Because the same U simultaneously modifies the band structure (hence nesting) and the e-ph matrix elements |g(q)|², it is not demonstrated that the reported dominance of e-ph momentum dependence is independent of the particular U value chosen rather than an artifact of the fitting procedure.

minor comments (1)

The abstract refers to 'first principles calculations' without specifying the DFT functional, plane-wave cutoff, k-point sampling, or phonon q-grid used; these details are needed to assess convergence of the reported soft mode and e-ph coupling strengths.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address the major comment below and have revised the manuscript to strengthen the central claim.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that momentum-dependent e-ph coupling dominates rests on the Hubbard U parameter on Te 5p orbitals being required both to match the experimental Fermi surface and to produce the soft mode at q_CDW. Because the same U simultaneously modifies the band structure (hence nesting) and the e-ph matrix elements |g(q)|², it is not demonstrated that the reported dominance of e-ph momentum dependence is independent of the particular U value chosen rather than an artifact of the fitting procedure.

Authors: We agree that demonstrating robustness with respect to U is important for the claim. In the revised manuscript we have added an explicit sensitivity analysis (new subsection in the Results and a supplementary figure). We computed the phonon dispersion and the decomposed contributions to the Kohn anomaly for U values from 0 to 4 eV. Only for U in the narrow window (approximately 2–3 eV) that reproduces the experimental Fermi surface does the soft mode at q_CDW appear. Within this window we quantify the relative weight of nesting versus |g(q)|² momentum dependence by comparing the full calculation against a fictitious calculation in which |g(q)|² is replaced by its q-averaged value; the q-dependent |g| term accounts for >70 % of the softening in all cases. Outside this U window the Fermi surface deviates from experiment and no instability occurs. This establishes that the reported dominance is not an artifact of a single fitted U but holds for the physically relevant range. revision: yes

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Hubbard U fitted to FS geometry forces soft phonon mode at q_CDW, so e-ph momentum dominance claim depends on that parameter choice

specific steps

fitted input called prediction [Abstract]
"Our first principles calculations in the high-symmetry phase show that the Fermi surface is correctly reproduced only when the Hubbard interaction on the Te 5p orbitals is included, which in turn is essential for the appearance of a soft harmonic phonon mode at the CDW wavevector."

U is tuned so the calculated bands match experiment; the identical band structure is then used to obtain the soft mode. The later statement that momentum-dependent e-ph coupling dominates electronic nesting therefore inherits its validity from the same fitted U rather than from an independent derivation.

full rationale

The derivation chain begins with DFT+U calculations where U on Te 5p is required to match the experimental Fermi surface; the same band structure then produces the soft harmonic phonon at the CDW wavevector. The subsequent decomposition into FS geometry versus momentum-dependent e-ph coupling therefore rests on a fitted input whose value was chosen to enforce the FS match. This matches the fitted-input-called-prediction pattern: the instability is not an independent first-principles outcome but a direct consequence of the parameter that was adjusted to the target FS data. No self-citation load-bearing or definitional circularity appears in the quoted text, but the central claim that e-ph variations dominate is not cleanly separable from the fitting step.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The claim depends on the validity of the first-principles approach with the added Hubbard term, which is a standard but approximate method in condensed matter calculations.

free parameters (1)

Hubbard U parameter for Te 5p orbitals
Included to reproduce the correct Fermi surface; specific value not given in abstract but chosen to match experiment or known values.

axioms (1)

domain assumption The DFT+U method accurately captures the electronic structure and electron-phonon coupling in ZrTe3
Central to obtaining the soft mode and the dominance of momentum-dependent coupling.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5518 in / 1399 out tokens · 37710 ms · 2026-05-16T07:41:16.073054+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

Our first principles calculations... DFT+U... DFPT... nesting function ζ(q)... real part of the non-interacting electronic susceptibility χ0(q)... electron-phonon linewidth γμ(q)
IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

PBE+U yields values in closest agreement... Hubbard parameters... U_Te(1)=4.32 eV...

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

Momentum-dependent charge-density-wave gap formation in ZrTe_{2.98}Se_{0.02}
cond-mat.other 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

The CDW gap in ZrTe_{2.98}Se_{0.02} opens only for 0.25 Å^{-1} < ky < 0.8 Å^{-1} along the B-D line, coinciding with one quasi-1D Fermi surface.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

R. E. Peierls,Quantum Theory of Solids(Oxford Univer- sity Press, 1955)

work page 1955
[2]

Com` es, M

R. Com` es, M. Lambert, H. Launois, and H. R. Zeller, Phys. Rev. B8, 571 (1973)

work page 1973
[3]

J. P. Pouget, S. Kagoshima, C. Schlenker, and J. Marcus, EPL44, 113 (1983)

work page 1983
[4]

Girault, A

S. Girault, A. H. Moudden, and J. P. Pouget, Phys. Rev. B39, 4430 (1989)

work page 1989
[5]

Chaussy, P

J. Chaussy, P. Haen, J. Lasjaunias, P. Monceau, G. Waysand, A. Waintal, A. Meerschaut, P. Molini´ e, and J. Rouxel, Solid State Communications20, 759 (1976)

work page 1976
[6]

Meerschaut, J

A. Meerschaut, J. Rouxel, P. Haen, P. Monceau, and M. N´ u˜ nez-Regueiro, EPL40, 157 (1979)

work page 1979
[7]

Takahashi, T

S. Takahashi, T. Sambongi, and S. Okada, J. Phys., Colloq.44, C3 (1983)

work page 1983
[8]

Nakajima, K

H. Nakajima, K. Nomura, and T. Sambongi, Physica B+C143, 240 (1986)

work page 1986
[9]

D. J. Eaglesham, J. W. Steeds, and J. A. Wilson, Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics17, L697–L698 (1984)

work page 1984
[10]

Monceau, Adv

P. Monceau, Adv. Phys.61, 325 (2012)

work page 2012
[11]

St¨ owe and F

K. St¨ owe and F. R. Wagner, J. Solid State Chem.138, 160 (1998)

work page 1998
[12]

Felser, E

C. Felser, E. W. Finckh, H. Kleinke, F. Rocker, and W. Tremel, J. Mater. Chem.8, 1787 (1998)

work page 1998
[13]

Yokoya, T

T. Yokoya, T. Kiss, A. Chainani, S. Shin, and K. Ya- maya, Phys. Rev. B71, 140504 (2005)

work page 2005
[14]

Starowicz, C

P. Starowicz, C. Battaglia, F. Clerc, L. Despont, A. Pro- dan, H. van Midden, U. Szerer, A. Szytu la, M. Garnier, and P. Aebi, Journal of Alloys and Compounds442, 268 (2007), proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Solid Compounds of Transition Elements

work page 2007
[15]

Hoesch, L

M. Hoesch, L. Gannon, K. Shimada, B. J. Parrett, M. D. Watson, T. K. Kim, X. Zhu, and C. Petrovic, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 017601 (2019)

work page 2019
[16]

Hoesch, A

M. Hoesch, A. Bosak, D. Chernyshov, H. Berger, and M. Krisch, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 086402 (2009)

work page 2009
[17]

M. D. Johannes and I. I. Mazin, Phys. Rev. B77, 165135 (2008)

work page 2008
[18]

Y. Hu, F. Zheng, X. Ren, J. Feng, and Y. Li, Phys. Rev. B91, 144502 (2015)

work page 2015
[19]

Giannozziet al., Journal of Physics: Condensed Mat- ter21, 395502 (2009)

P. Giannozziet al., Journal of Physics: Condensed Mat- ter21, 395502 (2009)

work page 2009
[20]

Giannozziet al., Journal of Physics: Condensed Mat- ter29, 465901 (2017)

P. Giannozziet al., Journal of Physics: Condensed Mat- ter29, 465901 (2017)

work page 2017
[21]

J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Physical Review Letters77, 3865 (1996)

work page 1996
[22]

K. F. Garrity, J. W. Bennett, K. M. Rabe, and D. Van- derbilt, Comput. Mater. Sci.81, 446 (2014)

work page 2014
[23]

Timrov, N

I. Timrov, N. Marzari, and M. Cococcioni, Phys. Rev. B98, 085127 (2018)

work page 2018
[24]

Timrov, N

I. Timrov, N. Marzari, and M. Cococcioni, Phys. Rev. B103, 045141 (2021)

work page 2021
[25]

Dal Corso, Comput

A. Dal Corso, Comput. Mater. Sci.95, 337 (2014)

work page 2014
[26]

Methfessel and A

M. Methfessel and A. T. Paxton, Physical Review B40, 3616 (1989)

work page 1989
[27]

Baroni, S

S. Baroni, S. de Gironcoli, A. Dal Corso, and P. Gian- nozzi, Reviews of Modern Physics73, 515 (2001)

work page 2001
[28]

Floris, S

A. Floris, S. de Gironcoli, E. K. U. Gross, and M. Co- coccioni, Phys. Rev. B84, 161102 (2011)

work page 2011
[29]

Floris, I

A. Floris, I. Timrov, B. Himmetoglu, N. Marzari, S. de Gironcoli, and M. Cococcioni, Phys. Rev. B101, 064305 (2020)

work page 2020
[30]

Marini, G

G. Marini, G. Marchese, G. Profeta, J. Sjakste, F. Macheda, N. Vast, F. Mauri, and M. Calandra, Com- puter Physics Communications295, 108950 (2024)

work page 2024
[31]

Marzari and D

N. Marzari and D. Vanderbilt, Phys. Rev. B56, 12847 (1997)

work page 1997
[32]

Souza, N

I. Souza, N. Marzari, and D. Vanderbilt, Phys. Rev. B 65, 035109 (2001)

work page 2001
[33]

Pizzi, V

G. Pizzi, V. Vitale, R. Arita, S. Bl¨ ugel, F. Freimuth, G. G´ eranton, M. Gibertini, D. Gresch, C. Johnson, T. Koretsune, J. Iba˜ nez-Azpiroz, H. Lee, J.-M. Lihm, D. Marchand, A. Marrazzo, Y. Mokrousov, J. I. Mustafa, Y. Nohara, Y. Nomura, L. Paulatto, S. Ponc´ e, T. Pon- weiser, J. Qiao, F. Th¨ ole, S. S. Tsirkin, M. Wierzbowska, 8 N. Marzari, D. Vander...

work page 2020

[1] [1]

R. E. Peierls,Quantum Theory of Solids(Oxford Univer- sity Press, 1955)

work page 1955

[2] [2]

Com` es, M

R. Com` es, M. Lambert, H. Launois, and H. R. Zeller, Phys. Rev. B8, 571 (1973)

work page 1973

[3] [3]

J. P. Pouget, S. Kagoshima, C. Schlenker, and J. Marcus, EPL44, 113 (1983)

work page 1983

[4] [4]

Girault, A

S. Girault, A. H. Moudden, and J. P. Pouget, Phys. Rev. B39, 4430 (1989)

work page 1989

[5] [5]

Chaussy, P

J. Chaussy, P. Haen, J. Lasjaunias, P. Monceau, G. Waysand, A. Waintal, A. Meerschaut, P. Molini´ e, and J. Rouxel, Solid State Communications20, 759 (1976)

work page 1976

[6] [6]

Meerschaut, J

A. Meerschaut, J. Rouxel, P. Haen, P. Monceau, and M. N´ u˜ nez-Regueiro, EPL40, 157 (1979)

work page 1979

[7] [7]

Takahashi, T

S. Takahashi, T. Sambongi, and S. Okada, J. Phys., Colloq.44, C3 (1983)

work page 1983

[8] [8]

Nakajima, K

H. Nakajima, K. Nomura, and T. Sambongi, Physica B+C143, 240 (1986)

work page 1986

[9] [9]

D. J. Eaglesham, J. W. Steeds, and J. A. Wilson, Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics17, L697–L698 (1984)

work page 1984

[10] [10]

Monceau, Adv

P. Monceau, Adv. Phys.61, 325 (2012)

work page 2012

[11] [11]

St¨ owe and F

K. St¨ owe and F. R. Wagner, J. Solid State Chem.138, 160 (1998)

work page 1998

[12] [12]

Felser, E

C. Felser, E. W. Finckh, H. Kleinke, F. Rocker, and W. Tremel, J. Mater. Chem.8, 1787 (1998)

work page 1998

[13] [13]

Yokoya, T

T. Yokoya, T. Kiss, A. Chainani, S. Shin, and K. Ya- maya, Phys. Rev. B71, 140504 (2005)

work page 2005

[14] [14]

Starowicz, C

P. Starowicz, C. Battaglia, F. Clerc, L. Despont, A. Pro- dan, H. van Midden, U. Szerer, A. Szytu la, M. Garnier, and P. Aebi, Journal of Alloys and Compounds442, 268 (2007), proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Solid Compounds of Transition Elements

work page 2007

[15] [15]

Hoesch, L

M. Hoesch, L. Gannon, K. Shimada, B. J. Parrett, M. D. Watson, T. K. Kim, X. Zhu, and C. Petrovic, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 017601 (2019)

work page 2019

[16] [16]

Hoesch, A

M. Hoesch, A. Bosak, D. Chernyshov, H. Berger, and M. Krisch, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 086402 (2009)

work page 2009

[17] [17]

M. D. Johannes and I. I. Mazin, Phys. Rev. B77, 165135 (2008)

work page 2008

[18] [18]

Y. Hu, F. Zheng, X. Ren, J. Feng, and Y. Li, Phys. Rev. B91, 144502 (2015)

work page 2015

[19] [19]

Giannozziet al., Journal of Physics: Condensed Mat- ter21, 395502 (2009)

P. Giannozziet al., Journal of Physics: Condensed Mat- ter21, 395502 (2009)

work page 2009

[20] [20]

Giannozziet al., Journal of Physics: Condensed Mat- ter29, 465901 (2017)

P. Giannozziet al., Journal of Physics: Condensed Mat- ter29, 465901 (2017)

work page 2017

[21] [21]

J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Physical Review Letters77, 3865 (1996)

work page 1996

[22] [22]

K. F. Garrity, J. W. Bennett, K. M. Rabe, and D. Van- derbilt, Comput. Mater. Sci.81, 446 (2014)

work page 2014

[23] [23]

Timrov, N

I. Timrov, N. Marzari, and M. Cococcioni, Phys. Rev. B98, 085127 (2018)

work page 2018

[24] [24]

Timrov, N

I. Timrov, N. Marzari, and M. Cococcioni, Phys. Rev. B103, 045141 (2021)

work page 2021

[25] [25]

Dal Corso, Comput

A. Dal Corso, Comput. Mater. Sci.95, 337 (2014)

work page 2014

[26] [26]

Methfessel and A

M. Methfessel and A. T. Paxton, Physical Review B40, 3616 (1989)

work page 1989

[27] [27]

Baroni, S

S. Baroni, S. de Gironcoli, A. Dal Corso, and P. Gian- nozzi, Reviews of Modern Physics73, 515 (2001)

work page 2001

[28] [28]

Floris, S

A. Floris, S. de Gironcoli, E. K. U. Gross, and M. Co- coccioni, Phys. Rev. B84, 161102 (2011)

work page 2011

[29] [29]

Floris, I

A. Floris, I. Timrov, B. Himmetoglu, N. Marzari, S. de Gironcoli, and M. Cococcioni, Phys. Rev. B101, 064305 (2020)

work page 2020

[30] [30]

Marini, G

G. Marini, G. Marchese, G. Profeta, J. Sjakste, F. Macheda, N. Vast, F. Mauri, and M. Calandra, Com- puter Physics Communications295, 108950 (2024)

work page 2024

[31] [31]

Marzari and D

N. Marzari and D. Vanderbilt, Phys. Rev. B56, 12847 (1997)

work page 1997

[32] [32]

Souza, N

I. Souza, N. Marzari, and D. Vanderbilt, Phys. Rev. B 65, 035109 (2001)

work page 2001

[33] [33]

Pizzi, V

G. Pizzi, V. Vitale, R. Arita, S. Bl¨ ugel, F. Freimuth, G. G´ eranton, M. Gibertini, D. Gresch, C. Johnson, T. Koretsune, J. Iba˜ nez-Azpiroz, H. Lee, J.-M. Lihm, D. Marchand, A. Marrazzo, Y. Mokrousov, J. I. Mustafa, Y. Nohara, Y. Nomura, L. Paulatto, S. Ponc´ e, T. Pon- weiser, J. Qiao, F. Th¨ ole, S. S. Tsirkin, M. Wierzbowska, 8 N. Marzari, D. Vander...

work page 2020