I am looking into the issue reported in Brakestad et al
we later realized that the BP86 versions in ORCA and MRChem are not identical, implying that a comparison of GTO to MW at the BP86 level would be affected by differences in the implementation of the functional, which our tests indicated could amount to several kcal/mol, when approaching the CBS limit.
by comparing Libxc and XCFun for this functional. The value of ftilde is one difference; using gga_c_p86_ft in Libxc yields much closer agreement with XCFun but I am still seeing a 2.9e-8 Eh difference at fixed density for the nitrogen atom.
My working assumption is that the difference is caused by the hack in xcfun
I am looking into the issue reported in Brakestad et al
by comparing Libxc and XCFun for this functional. The value of ftilde is one difference; using
gga_c_p86_ft
in Libxc yields much closer agreement with XCFun but I am still seeing a 2.9e-8 Eh difference at fixed density for the nitrogen atom.My working assumption is that the difference is caused by the hack in xcfun
https://github.com/dftlibs/xcfun/blob/ff498cde6ed29339f006cdd21bffa7a911915acb/src/functionals/p86c.cpp#L29
At variance, in Libxc the gradient is forced to be at least
1e-40
. Maybe the fudge parameter could be made smaller.