Delta project — archive of old website

Dublin Core Export

<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="" xmlns:oai_dc="" xmlns:xsi="" xsi:schemaLocation="">
  <dc:creator>Cottenier, Stefaan</dc:creator>
  <dc:description>The widespread popularity of density functional theory has given rise to an extensive range of dedicated codes for predicting molecular and crystalline properties. However, each code implements the formalism in a different way, raising questions about the reproducibility of such predictions. In K. Lejaeghere et al., Science 351 (6280), aad3000 (2016) (, we reported the results of a community-wide effort that compared 15 solid-state codes, using 40 different potentials or basis set types, to assess the quality of the Perdew-Burke-Ernzerhof equations of state for 71 elemental crystals. We conclude that predictions from recent codes and pseudopotentials agree very well, with pairwise differences that are comparable to those between different high-precision experiments. Older methods, however, have less precise agreement. Our benchmark provides a framework for users and developers to document the precision of new applications and methodological improvements. The underlying data of this paper were accessible during 2016-2023 at Several additions that made use of the same protocol were added later. As this website is obsolete and to ensure long-term continued access, these data are stored now under the present record of the Materials Cloud Archive.</dc:description>
  <dc:publisher>Materials Cloud</dc:publisher>
  <dc:rights>Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International</dc:rights>
  <dc:subject>Delta project</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>unary crystals</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>DFT benchmarking</dc:subject>
  <dc:title>Delta project — archive of old website</dc:title>