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

abacus: fix bug in collecting force #669

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jul 2, 2024

Conversation

pxlxingliang
Copy link
Contributor

@pxlxingliang pxlxingliang commented Jun 6, 2024

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Bug Fixes

    • Modified force data handling in computational simulations to return None instead of an empty list when no forces are present.
  • Tests

    • Added new test scenarios to validate force data handling in labeled system objects for computational simulations.

Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Jun 6, 2024

Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The updates improve the dpdata/abacus/scf.py module by altering how force data is handled when unavailable in computations. The get_force function now returns None instead of an empty list, and get_frame initializes force data more appropriately based on its presence. Additionally, a new test class ensures these changes work as expected by verifying force data handling in specific scenarios.

Changes

File(s) Change Summary
dpdata/abacus/scf.py Modified get_force to return None instead of an empty list; updated get_frame initialization for force data.
tests/test_abacus_pw_scf.py Added a new test class TestABACUSLabeledOutputNoFS to validate the handling of absent force data.
tests/abacus.scf/INPUT.ch4-noforcestress Introduced input parameters for a computational simulation related to a CH4 molecule.

Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 4441c3f and e0b6b80.

Files selected for processing (1)
  • tests/test_abacus_pw_scf.py (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (2)
tests/test_abacus_pw_scf.py (2)

153-155: LGTM!

The tearDown method correctly handles file removal.


157-164: LGTM!

The test_noforcestress_job method correctly verifies the expected behavior of the system_ch4 object.


Tip

Early access features: enabled

We are currently testing the following features in early access:

  • OpenAI gpt-4o model for code reviews and chat: OpenAI claims that this model is better at understanding and generating code than the previous models. We seek your feedback over the next few weeks before making it generally available.

Note:

  • You can enable or disable early access features from the CodeRabbit UI or by updating the CodeRabbit configuration file.
  • Please join our Discord Community to provide feedback and report issues.
  • OSS projects are currently opted into early access features by default.

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share
Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 1

@@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ def collect_force(outlines):
def get_force(outlines, natoms):
force = collect_force(outlines)
if len(force) == 0:
return [[]]
return None
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Tip

Codebase Verification

The change in get_force to return None instead of an empty list is not handled correctly in the codebase. Specifically, in dpdata/abacus/scf.py, the return value of get_force is used without checking for None, which could lead to errors.

  • dpdata/abacus/scf.py: The get_force function's return value is used directly without checking for None.

Please update the code to handle the None return value appropriately.

Analysis chain

Verify the impact of returning None instead of an empty list on other parts of the code.

Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that all usages of `get_force` handle the new `None` return value correctly.

# Test: Search for the function usage. Expect: Proper handling of `None`.
rg --type python $'get_force'

Length of output: 59



Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that all usages of `get_force` handle the new `None` return value correctly.

# Test: Search for the function usage. Expect: Proper handling of `None`.
rg 'get_force'

Length of output: 291



Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Extract lines around the usage of `get_force` to verify handling of `None` return value.

# Extract lines around the usage in dpdata/abacus/scf.py
rg -A 5 -B 5 'get_force' dpdata/abacus/scf.py

# Extract lines around the usage in dpdata/qe/scf.py
rg -A 5 -B 5 'get_force' dpdata/qe/scf.py

# Extract lines around the usage in dpdata/plugins/ase.py
rg -A 5 -B 5 'get_force' dpdata/plugins/ase.py

Length of output: 1938

Copy link

codspeed-hq bot commented Jun 6, 2024

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #669 will not alter performance

Comparing pxlxingliang:scf-f (e0b6b80) with devel (fb85312)

Summary

✅ 2 untouched benchmarks

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 6, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 84.42%. Comparing base (4bb4069) to head (e0b6b80).
Report is 5 commits behind head on devel.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##            devel     #669      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   84.31%   84.42%   +0.10%     
==========================================
  Files          81       81              
  Lines        7142     7144       +2     
==========================================
+ Hits         6022     6031       +9     
+ Misses       1120     1113       -7     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@njzjz
Copy link
Member

njzjz commented Jun 6, 2024

I am wondering if it works, considering System will check the shape of the data.

@pxlxingliang
Copy link
Contributor Author

I am wondering if it works, considering System will check the shape of the data.

In current dpdata, it does work. It seems that the System does not check the dimension of force.

Is there a specification for how to store force in a system without force?

@wanghan-iapcm wanghan-iapcm requested a review from njzjz June 7, 2024 06:45
Signed-off-by: Jinzhe Zeng <jinzhe.zeng@rutgers.edu>
Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 1

tests/test_abacus_pw_scf.py Show resolved Hide resolved
@wanghan-iapcm wanghan-iapcm merged commit e429d9a into deepmodeling:devel Jul 2, 2024
12 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[BUG] The LabeledSystem would raise error when the abacus log file does not contain force
3 participants