Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Symmetric neighbours with solvents #1462

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

bhourahine
Copy link
Member

Use the symmetric neighbour list for the solvent models (as that part of the code internally is inconsistent with the default single triangle of the neighbours, leading to the energy being atom order dependent).

Note, results now seem invariant to permutation of atom order, but are untested whether the results are physically correct.

Closes #1069

@bhourahine bhourahine requested a review from awvwgk May 15, 2024 09:16
@bhourahine bhourahine added the bug label May 15, 2024
@aradi aradi self-assigned this May 17, 2024
Copy link
Member

@awvwgk awvwgk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, looks like a good fix

@bhourahine
Copy link
Member Author

@awvwgk Do you have any suggestions for checking numerical correctness? About all I can think is to test the GFN models against the xTB implementation, or to try and match literature results from other solvent implementations for DFTB2.

@awvwgk
Copy link
Member

awvwgk commented May 18, 2024

We can compute the same solvation models with xtb to check for the values of the surface integration

Use the symmetric neighbour list for the solvent models
(as that part of the code internally assumes symmetric
neighbours, not the default single triangle, leading to
the energy being atomic order dependent).

Note, results now seem invariant to permutation of atom order,
but are untested whether the results are physically correct.
Copy link
Member

@vanderhe vanderhe left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Symmetric neighbor-list cutoff change is correct, as far as I can see.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Inconsistent results for the identical system with different order of coordinates
4 participants