Closed Saberve closed 4 months ago
predict
does not do geometry optimization (I think it's clear at a glance). I don't under why you expect the energy is the same before and after the optimization .
Sorry, i mistakenly thought that predict
had the function of minimize
. Regarding the second point, I do not expect the energy to remain consistent before and after optimization. Actually, this is exactly the problem that troubles me.
In your model, Al
is the second element. So when you create an Al atom, you should run pair_coeff * * Al
(with a newer DeePMD-kit) or change the type of Al
from 1 to 2.
Bug summary
I trained the DP potentials of Mg, Li, and Al metals using DPGEN, but encountered some issues while verifying the lattice constants. I used DP potential+LAMMPS to calculate the lattice constants of three metals separately, and the results are shown in the figure. DP potential + Lammps cannot calculate the lattice constants of Li and Al.
DeePMD-kit Version
v2.0.1
TensorFlow Version
2.5.0
How did you download the software?
Offline packages
Input Files, Running Commands, Error Log, etc.
Partial log files of Al
log file of Al log_Al.txt
But when I use dp.predict, the results are correct. This question is similar to #2980 submitted by @PolyuWeldingSpock.
I also tried using lammps for relaxation under npt, and only the trajectory of Mg is correct, while Li and Al diffuse like gas.
I want to know why there is such a big difference in the results between dp. predict and lammps. Is the DP potential trained reliable? Why is only the trajectory of Mg correct. Is there any compatibility issue between DP potential and lammmps?
These files contain DP potential and log files Al.zip Li.zip Mg.zip
Steps to Reproduce
These are param.json files and log files used for training DP potentials. Al_trian_DP.zip Li_train_DP.zip Mg_train_DP.zip
Further Information, Files, and Links
No response