Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 3 Next »

Participants

Goals

  • Updates from MolSSI

    • QCFractal release + prod QCArchive upgrade

  • Compute

    • QM and MM workers on Lilac

    • ANI and MM workers on Newcastle

    • QM, MM, and QM-200g workers on PRP

  • New submissions

    • dipeptide dataset

    • imposed electric field in QM

  • User questions/issues

  • Science support needs

  • Infrastructure needs / advances

    • what is the latest QCEngine compatible with prod QCArchive / QCFractal?

    • psi4 on conda-forge

Discussion topics

Item

Presenter

Notes

Updates from MolSSI

Ben

  • BP – Waiting on PR number #693 to finish CI, then can merge and cut release, deploy to production

  • DD: should we make the same change on the next branch?

    • BP: will let you know; probably trying a rebase first

Compute

David

  • QM and MM workers on Lilac

  • ANI and MM workers on Newcastle

  • QM, MM, and QM-200g workers on PRP

    • DD – Still needed?

    • PB – ~1000 of my big jobs errored out, I’ll error cycle those manually later today.

  • New submissions

  • dipeptide dataset – For Chapin Cavender – First PR below allows setting of keywords on collections (will enable constraining chi1 and chi2 on jobs) – Second PR threads the new keywords through.

  • imposed electric field in QM; follow-up

    • JHorton implemented new keywords in QCSubmit to allow for perturbed dipole, cut a release as version

    • WW – Which driver is this dataset using? Energy? Optimize? Gradient?

      • DD – This one is an optimization.

      • WW – I was going to see if I could reproduce wavefunction from in-memory and out-of-memory QCEngine calculation. Probably an MP2 problem, since if I change to HF there isn’t a problem. So is this an MP2 issue?

      • DD – Let me make sure I understand – The MP2 calculations with the OpenFF default method completed. Did you see the discrepancy here?

      • WW – I haven’t pulled down the results from QCA. But

      • JW – Clarify the discrepancy?

      • WW – Issue on psi4 – Says that before psi4 1.3.2 has a difference in outcomes for in-memory vs. out-of-memory calculations. But this shouldn’t be affecting me, since all of my calcs are using psi4 1.4.0. But it’s possible that the issue remains for MP2 or multithreaded runs.

      • PB – So this discrepancy is arising from using SBoothroyd’s script to pull down wavefunctions and make ESP grids?

      • WW – It should be the same script to get the in-memory and out of memory calcs. The issue I’m seeing is from MP2.

      • DD – How big is the difference?

      • WW – A normal ESP in atomic units is .0000x, and what I’m seeing is 1.x or 1x.

      • DD – We’re using psi4 1.4 in production

      • WW – I think I’m still seeing this issue when using MP2, will confirm with a clean environment and report what I find in next week’s meeting. Psi4 devs dealt with something similar in the above-linked issues so they will probably be able to fix this quickly if needed.

    • v1.1 fix:

  • (DD submitted)

User questions/issues

Science support needs

Infrastructure needs / advances

  • what is the latest QCEngine compatible with prod QCArchive / QCFractal?

  • psi4 on conda-forge

Action items

  •  

Decisions

  • No labels