-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 51
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
Behaviour of amber parser on file with duplicated time #315
Comments
Hi @xiki-tempula , The The only problem may arise if one tries to concatenate files from different simulations, but this is the case also for GROMACS I think! |
@DrDomenicoMarson Thanks. |
I don't have the time to test this right now, but I think it shouldn't be an issue! I think there should be an Error and not a Warning, if data is found after the finish because I don't know if the logic that is used now would deal with a single file that is a concatenation of several output AMBER files though. |
Close this via the concatenation of the pandas dataframe #316 |
An error should be thrown if the input is a concatenated amber output file |
In many occasions, one would need to run simulation in chunks. For 10 ns simulation, one run the first ns, the seconds ns and so on. For Gromacs, this is easy and the output would be a continuous file. However, given that AMBER doesn't have a checkpoint continue mechanism. A convention to do continuation would be that one generate a number of amber output files and concatenate the text files together.
This would result in
So you have duplicated time points in the same input file.
The current behaviour is that when we reach the end of the first file
5. TIMINGS
, we close the file parser, so the rest of the information is gone, which is not ideal.There are several ways of solving this problem.
The easiest way would be to just to remove this break https://github.com/alchemistry/alchemlyb/blob/master/src/alchemlyb/parsing/amber.py#L361
This would allow the parser to continue. On the other hand, instead of logging the data for
0~1 ns, 0~1 ns, 0~1 ns
. This would log 0~1 ns, 1~2 ns, 2~3 ns
. In some sense this would mean that we are not reading the data as it is. On the other hand, this would probably be the expected behaviour in this case so this might be fine.The more involved way of solving this problem might be to log the data as it is, For example,
0~1 ns, 0~1 ns, 0~1 ns
. Then the user might need to change the time point by themselves.I'm in favour of the easy solution but is not sure of this would create some additional problem @DrDomenicoMarson
Here is an example input file , note that only 50 data points are loaded.
amber.out.zip
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: