2021-07-19 Core Developers meeting notes

Participants

  • @Jeffrey Wagner

  • @Pavan Behara

  • @Matt Thompson

Discussion topics

Item

Notes

Item

Notes

Updates

  • MT

    • VSites

      • Gradually adding in functionality, yet to add an “everything bagel” molecule

      • ChargeIncrements are a bit complicated, since they seem to have different meanings in CIMH and VSiteHandler

        • CIMH just adds the increment to each tagged atom

        • VSiteHandler takes some positive/negative charge from the atoms, and put them onto a non-atom

      • Worked with TG on how our vsites interact with meaning of FD/2FD/3FD – These largely differ by how they define distance (either explicitly, or relative to some other measurement). I’d picked the wrong one initially, but now I’m on the right track.

      • Found a handful of bugs with AMBER energies. Not sure whether these are in the file outputs themselves, or sander settings.

    • Two toolkit bugs

  • PB

    • Worked on theory benchmark, dataset submission and analysis scripts

    • Tried to reproduce TF’s problem, no success.

      • JW – Let’s see what he says, right now we don’t have the info we need to reproduce

    • Re: Chapin meeting – Will we need to do 2d torsiondrives?

      • JW – I’d expect that we might need to do this eventually, but it would be reasonable to restrict to 1D initially, so we can do a cheap first iteration before we commit a lot of resources

      • SB – We have some 2D torsiondrives going, but they’re proper+improper. They’re also taking a really long time, seems like a lot of dead jobs. Not sure what’s happening here, may be worth investigating.

      • JW – Could look at the root cause for these – If it’s job pre-emption on the compute clusters, we might consider just spending money on dedicated compute.

  • JW

    • Vacation for a lot of past two weeks

    • ParmEd/OFFTK #1019

    • Benchmarking release w/ Dotson.

      • Next release needs

        • sage rc1 to be pacakges/available (done, with new openforcefields pacakge)

        • new analysis method (LD is working on this)

      • LD found that sage rc1 has a high error rate in MM minimizations, though it could be due to compute resources. DD is working on reproducing with public dataset

        • SB – I ran through the public set using sage rc1 before the workshop and didn’t see a huge error rate

        • JW – There may have been a bug in the error reporting, so I’ll check with Dotson about this and get back to you Wednesday.

    • Next up

      • Finish debugging OFFTK #1019 and update notebook

      • Announce new FFs (1.3.1 and 2.0.0-rc1)

      • Followup workshops announcement

      • Fox analysis debugging

      • Benchmarking release

      • 0.10.0 OFFTK release

      • 2021 Roadmap update

    • SB – How do pharma partners feel about docker?

      • JW – I can’t recall if we polled them about this.

      • SB – This would be a way easier release pathway. The benchmarking+bespoke stuff could have a much easier time deploying internally+externally.

  • LW

    • Was off most of the last few days

    • Read CC’s plan for protein FF. Tried making a “null” FF, where I make a protein FF using the amino acid building blocks.

    • Tried using Psiresp to generate charges.

    • OpenEye wrote back to David about atom-order-dependent geometries (and therefore partial charges). They told us to do our own minimization, and when I tried this out (using RDKit to minimize) I got much better charge consistency for different atom orders.

      • SB – Have you tried completely disabling AM1 geometry optimization?

      • LW – Yes, this gives consistent charges.

      • JW – Connor Davel (Boulder undergrad) has shown preliminary data that shows that charges don’t really change if we don’t allow geometry minimization at all

      • SB – It’d be good to check in with CBy to see if there are edge cases where minimization is really important.

      • LW – What kinds of molecules is CD working with?

        • JW – 20ish heavy atoms

      • SB – Has anyone tried using PySCF? They seem to have an AM1 implementation

  • SB –

    • Out on vacation last week

    • Opened PR to QCEngine to do torsiondrives. MolSSI/Dotson will need to review/decide on whether this fits with their architecture

    • qcsubmit is on conda-forge! Now compatible with new namespaces. (fragmenter also got added around the same time)

    • Working on getting bespokefit ready for september workshop – Additional pedantic-friendliness, using fastapi, more microservice-focused architecture.

    •  

Sprint planning

Meet at 46 past the hour.

Action items

Decisions