Skip to content
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

No safeguard for oversize orbital counts #2341

Closed
jtkrogel opened this issue Mar 13, 2020 · 3 comments
Closed

No safeguard for oversize orbital counts #2341

jtkrogel opened this issue Mar 13, 2020 · 3 comments
Labels

Comments

@jtkrogel
Copy link
Contributor

QMCPACK currently crashes hard when more orbitals are requested in a determinant than are present in the ESHDF file. It should abort with a warning instead.

This issue is currently catching new users and has caused delays in production calculations.

@jtkrogel jtkrogel added the bug label Mar 13, 2020
@prckent
Copy link
Contributor

prckent commented Mar 13, 2020

Please confirm if the following statement is correct:

For example, the user has modified the "size" entry in the determinant below, and the pwscf.pscf.h5 file (in this case) does not have sufficient orbitals.

         <determinantset type="einspline" href="pwscf.pwscf.h5" tilematrix="1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1" twistnum="0" source="ion0" meshfactor="1.0" precision="double">
            <slaterdeterminant>
               <determinant id="updet" size="4">
                  <occupation mode="ground" spindataset="0"/>
               </determinant>
               <determinant id="downdet" size="4">
                  <occupation mode="ground" spindataset="0"/>
               </determinant>
            </slaterdeterminant>
         </determinantset>

@jtkrogel
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yes. It is more of a risk in spin polarized situations when there can be a degree of user choice/input, i.e. a too large spin polarization requested, resulting in size for the up determinant being larger than the orbital count in the file.

@ye-luo
Copy link
Contributor

ye-luo commented Oct 20, 2021

Should have been fixed by #3485

@ye-luo ye-luo closed this as completed Oct 20, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants