Deyu Lu1,Fanchen Meng1,Benedikt Maurer2,Fabian Peschel2,Sencer Selcuk1,Mark Hybertsen1,Xiaohui Qu1,Christian Vorwerk3,Claudia Draxl2,John Vinson4
Brookhaven National Laboratory1,Humboldt University of Berlin2,The University of Chicago3,National Institute of Standards and Technology4
Deyu Lu1,Fanchen Meng1,Benedikt Maurer2,Fabian Peschel2,Sencer Selcuk1,Mark Hybertsen1,Xiaohui Qu1,Christian Vorwerk3,Claudia Draxl2,John Vinson4
Brookhaven National Laboratory1,Humboldt University of Berlin2,The University of Chicago3,National Institute of Standards and Technology4
X-ray absorption spectroscopy (XAS) is an element-specific materials characterization technique that is sensitive to structural and electronic properties. First-principles simulated XAS has been widely used as a powerful tool to interpret experimental spectra and draw physical insights. Recently, there has also been growing interest in building computational XAS databases to enable data analytics and machine learning applications. However, there are non-trivial differences among commonly used XAS simulation codes, both in underlying theoretical formalism and in technical implementation. Reliable and reproducible computational XAS databases require systematic benchmark studies. In this work, we benchmarked Ti K-edge XAS simulations of ten representative Ti-O binary compounds, which we refer to as the Ti-O-10 dataset, using three state-of-the-art codes: XSPECTRA, OCEAN and exciting. We systematically studied the convergence behavior with respect to the input parameters and developed a workflow to automate and standardize the calculations to ensure converged spectra. Our benchmark comparison shows: (1) the two Bethe-Salpeter equation (BSE) codes (OCEAN and exciting) have excellent agreement in the energy range studied (up to 35 eV above the onset) with an average Spearman’s rank correlation score of 0.998; (2) good agreement is obtained between the core-hole potential code (XSPECTRA) and BSE codes (OCEAN and exciting) with an average Spearman’s rank correlation score of 0.990. Our benchmark study provides important standards for first-principles XAS simulations with broad impact in data-driven XAS analysis.