-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
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
Improving RDF #290
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Improving RDF #290
Conversation
Can you elaborate on the small systems seem to fail? |
There are value errors and the RDFs look sometimes different to what they should look like. |
If you have any example that would be helpful. It's an odd problem. |
Is this PR ready to go? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
all the code looks good. if tests pass we can go with it unless there are some specific issues
Unfortunately there are still issues with the Code that need to be resolved. |
Which ones? I'd like to bring this PR in so that I can run a black restructure on the code and merge the correctly formatted version. This could also wait until after all current PRs are done but it will make it a bit messier. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Removing approval to avoid accidental merge.
If I remember correctly, running it with different parameters for |
I will look into it tonight |
I've run the RDF on a 1000 atom system with differing correct mini batch arguments and received the same values each time. I will now check the small system size comment. |
@PythonFZ I think this can really be closed now. |
I don't think it has to - the idea is still valid and would improve the RDF speed. It needs to be fixed and tested before merging, but I don't see any need to close this PR. |
I attempted to optimize the RDF code a little bit.
On an 108000 atoms system using
on an RTX2080 this code is about 20 % faster then the old code (0.76 GHz v. 0.91 GHz).
Main changes are:
Additions:
benchmark
kwargcorrect_minibatch_batching
kwargStill missing
correct_minibatch_batching