-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 47
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
Infrastructure for making input files for QC codes #43
Comments
It would be good to join forces on this, we will begin implementing this kind of tech into two of our codes Elemental and Engine. Both of this will produce and consume schema. So far we haven't focused too much on the increasing the number of codes that we interface too, but as this ecosystem enters beta that will become a focus. Feel free to join our Slack from any link on the READMEs. |
@dgasmith That could be interesting and I have considered it, but we seem to have requirements that are not covered in QCEngine. Anyway, your comments would be very much appreciated. We're not aiming at fully standardizing the interface to QC chemistry codes. We'd just want something pragmatic to generate input files for various use cases. One requirement, which is going against standardizing, is that a user should be able to provide its own template input file, just to make it possible to control uncommon features of a QC code. Similarly, we'd like to keep existing outputs rather than only keeping a condensed summary, because they sometimes contain useful but very code-specific results. (These two points were useful in previous studies.) Would QCEngine somehow be able to deal with these requirements? |
Generating input files was, granted, not originally not in our purview. However, we have had many requests for this and three of the MolSSI Software fellows have decided to take this on so we have been working to relax this constraint. As this was a decision made about a week ago, progress has been relatively small and we are still working through the best way to accomplish behavior. This is an area where we would really like to join forces on. We always intended to keep full output files by default as well and we do so for all compute backends that contain them (this is the default for all programs, but Psi4 which will change today). There are We can bring more people to the conversation on our Slack. |
I'm thinking what would be the best way to organize the interface to other QC programs compatible with existing iodata structure. Here are some thoughts:
I just started thinking how to start and was not sure how to proceed: make something specific for one QC program or generic with different options of QC input files as @tovrstra suggested. |
The parsers could just use the same API as we already have with the For writing input files, classes seem overkill. Just functions as shown in the first message should cover all the needs. This makes it also fairly easy to move all the shared code to a low-level but generic |
Thanks for the quick reply. I will write a first version of orca log parser and put all QC input file formats in one file "write_input.py" as functions as you suggested in the beginning. Once ready I will push the draft versions to get the feedback from all. |
A note from @tovrstra about a feature not supported in PR #188 when writing Gaussian input files: |
@FarnazH I'm going to turn that comment into a separate issue, se we can deal with it in a separate PR to keep things manageable. |
We should have functions to easily write input files for a few quantum chemistry codes of interest (Gaussian, PSI4, ORCA). Suggested API:
Required attributes for the IOData class are defined in #41.
Some remotely related code can be found here: https://github.com/theochem/horton/blob/master/horton/scripts/atomdb.py
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: