The question about the KPOINTS.

[VASP001]

I'm puzzled by the kpoints-generation in the manual.
The manual shows us two ways of producing KPOINTS.
The first is like this :
Auto
0
4 4 4
0 0 0

The second is like this :
Auto generation
0
Cartesian
0.25 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.25 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.25
0.50 0.50 0.50

And for the fcc ,they are equate with each other .
I have several questions as follows:
1.How one translate into another one ?
2.For low-symmetry system, can the translation still work ?
3.I'm recently do some test about the HSE06/B3LPY/PBE0 ,and the file with log always gives a warring like this :

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| W W AA RRRRR N N II N N GGGG !!! |
| W W A A R R NN N II NN N G G !!! |
| W W A A R R N N N II N N N G !!! |
| W WW W AAAAAA RRRRR N N N II N N N G GGG ! |
| WW WW A A R R N NN II N NN G G |
| W W A A R R N N II N N GGGG !!! |
| |
| Your generating k-point grid is not commensurate to the symmetry |
| of the lattice. This can cause slow convergence with respect |
| to k-points for HF type calculations |
| suggested SOLUTIONS: |
| ) if not already the case, use automatic k-point generation |
| ) shift your grid to Gamma (G) (e.g. required for hex or fcc lattice) |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Does the second ways of generate KPOINTS really improve the performance of the computation ?


Waiting your reply .



<span class='smallblacktext'>[ Edited ]</span>

[support_vasp]

Hi,

We're sorry that we didn’t answer your question. This does not live up to the quality of support that we aim to provide. The team has since expanded. If we can still help with your problem, please ask again in a new post, linking to this one, and we will answer as quickly as possible.

Best wishes,

VASP