To compare the GAPW and GPW implementations, the plane wave grid cutoff was adjusted to 800 Ry. Computations were performed relying on Goedecker-Teter-Hutter (GTH) pseudo potentials that were optimized for PBE0 density functional computations and using ccGRB-T orbital basis sets. The augmented basis sets for GAPW were constructed as before by relying on the orbital basis, now of ccGRB-type, adding a small number of primitive Gaussians. A comparative analysis of maximum errors (Max) and mean absolute errors (MAEs) for both ground-state and excited-state computations is provided in Table . Even though maximum errors are slightly increased and MAEs slightly improved in comparison to the assessment with respect to Gaussian, the overall trend and magnitudes of errors are comparable, emphasizing that sufficient accuracy can be reached with GAPW. More explicitly, errors in ground-state and excited-state forces are again comparable with a maximum error of 0.0932 eV/Å and 0.0931 eV/Å, respectively. To highlight the overall retained accuracy of the GAPW ansatz, the agreement in GPW and GAPW excitation energies is visualized in the correlation plot of Figure .