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

Add option to start torsiondrive with multiple conformations #28

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Feb 15, 2019

Conversation

ChayaSt
Copy link
Collaborator

@ChayaSt ChayaSt commented Feb 8, 2019

Description

Added the ability to start torsiondrive from multiple starting conformations. This can speed up optimization and allows for better sampling of minima.

Todos

Notable points that this PR has either accomplished or will accomplish.

  • Add dense omega sampling as conformer generation option.
  • Generate an ND grid of initial conformation by driving list of torsions. This allows sampling of some terminal protons that don't get sampled even with omega.SetSampleHydrogens(True)
  • Remove conformations that have severe steric clashes.
  • Added regression test for workflow API

Questions

  • What should be the default setting for the initial conformation grid? Since torsiondrive optimizes all initial conformation and uses the lowest energy of the grid point, there is a tradeoff when starting with too many initial conformations.

Status

  • Ready to go

@codecov-io
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #28 into master will increase coverage by 12.98%.
The diff coverage is 76.08%.

@ChayaSt ChayaSt merged commit 02c45a9 into master Feb 15, 2019
@ChayaSt ChayaSt changed the title [WIP] Add option to start torsiondrive with multiple conformations Add option to start torsiondrive with multiple conformations Feb 15, 2019
@ChayaSt ChayaSt deleted the mult_conf branch February 15, 2019 16:41
@dgasmith
Copy link
Member

Cool! My note of versioning options is that you may want to consider a simple number rather than semantic versioning as that is really specific to code and makes less sense for option versions. Something to think about.

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.

None yet

3 participants