InterfaceAnalyzerMover [ WARNING ] calculator already exists

[DantonIvanochko]

Dear Rosetta community,
I am getting the following warnings when running the InterfaceAnalyzerMover while looping over a list of poses:

protocols.analysis.InterfaceAnalyzerMover: [ WARNING ] In InterfaceAnalyzerMover, calculator Sasa_1 already exists, this is hopefully correct for your purposes
protocols.analysis.InterfaceAnalyzerMover: [ WARNING ] In InterfaceAnalyzerMover, calculator InterfaceNeighborDefinition_1 already exists, this is hopefully correct for your purposes
protocols.analysis.InterfaceAnalyzerMover: [ WARNING ] In InterfaceAnalyzerMover, calculator InterfaceDeltaEnergetics_1 already exists, this is hopefully correct for your purposes
protocols.analysis.InterfaceAnalyzerMover: [ WARNING ] In InterfaceAnalyzerMover, calculator NumberHBonds_1 already exists, this is hopefully correct for your purposes
protocols.analysis.InterfaceAnalyzerMover: [ WARNING ] In InterfaceAnalyzerMover, calculator BuriedUnsatisfiedPolars_1 already exists, this is hopefully correct for your purposes

I've tried the following settings but none of them seem to fix this issue:

interface_analyzer.fresh_instance()
interface_analyzer.reinitialize_for_each_job()
interface_analyzer.clear_info()

Any help would be much appreciated!

[roccomoretti]

If all you're using is the InterfaceAnalyzerMover (especially if you're instantiating multiple copies of it), then you can safely ignore that warning -- There's a central registration of calculators it uses. But if one InterfaceAnalyzerMover registers those calculators, it will show up as present when the other InterfaceAnalyzerMovers go to register them. But that shouldn't be an issue, as all the InterfaceAnalyzerMover should register them with the same settings, so it doesn't matter which InterfaceAnalyzerMover actually does the registration.

It would only be an issue if you're using something else which also goes to register those calculators with those specific names, and uses a different setting. That's probably not very likely.

[DantonIvanochko]

That's very helpful, thank you @roccomoretti