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

CREST 3.0.1 won't run the published graphene example #323

Open
Cobalt-59 opened this issue Jul 19, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

CREST 3.0.1 won't run the published graphene example #323

Cobalt-59 opened this issue Jul 19, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@Cobalt-59
Copy link

Cobalt-59 commented Jul 19, 2024

Hi Dr.  Pracht,

Could you please have a look at the code in CREST 3.0.1? Specifically, I was previously able to run the test example (tyrosine on graphene) from the literature/CREST documentation website using CREST V 2.12 with no problems.

However, this example no longer works in CREST 3.0.1 when using exactly the same input files. I've tried everything and checked everything as best I can with no luck. My terminal output indicates an early stop:


 Command line input:
 $ crest Tyr_Ghex.tmol --subrmsd --shake 0 --tstep 1 --cinp constraints.inp

  --cinp : constraints.inp

 <constraints.inp> file present.
 content of the constraining file (sorted):

$constrain
  atoms: 1-252
  force constant=0.5
  reference=Tyr_Ghex.ref
$metadyn
  atoms: 253-276
Parsing xtb-type input file constraints.inp to set up calculators ...


There is no further output after the last line above. The odd thing is that the coord file gets written, but then the program stops because it says the coord file does not exist.

Others may have reported a similar issue here. In any event, it would be appreciated if you could help us out a bit as CREST is proving to be useful for our research.

A ZIP file with the job files from the run directory is included below for inspection.

check_run1.zip

Thanks & Best

@pprcht
Copy link
Contributor

pprcht commented Jul 19, 2024

It starts up just fine for me. Maybe it requires a bit more memory due to all the constraints? Either that, or it is related to #314 and you need to update to the continuous release.

Also, as a side note, I probably wouldn't attempt to use the ref constraint for such a large system anymore. Freezing the atoms is more reasonable. I'll need to update/create a new example for that.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants