[gmx-developers] Regression tests updated on git
Mark Abraham
Mark.Abraham at anu.edu.au
Thu Aug 13 15:21:40 CEST 2009
Hi,
I've done a lot of updates and improvements to the regression tests.
They're git-ified and available via
git clone git.gromacs.org:regressiontests.git
There are a number of outstanding issues & resolutions:
*) the lack of a definitive GROMACS 3.x version makes life difficult - a
bugfixed 3.3.4 that we knew produced correct reference data in all
regression test cases would make the ongoing utility of this regression
test set much higher
*) As it stands, I am tempted to add a mechanism whereby the reference
version is recorded by grepping the output of mdrun, and grabbing values
of relevant environment variables. If/when tests ever need future
revisions, it'd be best to have a record that was generated
automatically, rather than relying on the maintainer to have simulated
and documented correctly.
*) A better solution would be to create a GROMACS utility program that
will return the arguments to configure, and such. Being able to call
gmxconf -configure
or
gmxconf -version
to get this data would have quite a few applications, including
troubleshooting all kinds of issues. libxml2 has such a mechanism, for
example.
*) simple/rb1 used to have what I believe was a bug in the .mdp file
(see
http://lists.gromacs.org/pipermail/gmx-developers/2009-August/003573.html)
but I would like someone who knew how this test was supposed to work to
inspect it, please.
*) complex/field 4.0.5 does not reproduce 3.3.2 - most of the virial
terms at step 0 differ. Is this expected?
*) Likewise, under at least some circumstances many of the complex tests
and even simple/morse can fail the virial check (and sometimes others)
at various steps after the first. This looks inevitable - it happens
even with identical GROMACS versions on different hardware running with
NOASSEMBLYLOOPS=1. Do we just tell the user that this behaviour is
expected and not to worry? If so, why bother doing the check?
*) pdb2gmx fails two tests with 4.0.5 on either the original potential
energies generated with the 3.3.2_prerelease version, and on my
recomputed 3.3.2 energies.
Against the original energies:
mabraham.anu.edu.au 386% ./gmxtest.pl pdb2gmx -suffix _405
Will test using executable suffix _405
Here follows a list of the lines in reference_s.log and ener.log which
did not
pass the comparison test within tolerance 0.05
Index Reference This test Error Description
11 -33.9883 -29.4849 0.07095 1aml.pdb with G53a6 using
vsite=none and water=spc
12 -33.9883 -29.4849 0.07095 1aml.pdb with G53a6 using
vsite=none and water=spce
There were 2/45 differences in final energy with the reference file
pdb2gmx tests FAILED
And against my 3.3.2 energies:
mabraham.anu.edu.au 18% ./gmxtest.pl pdb2gmx -suffix _405
Will test using executable suffix _405
Here follows a list of the lines in reference_s.log and ener.log which
did not
pass the comparison test within tolerance 0.05
Index Reference This test Error Description
11 -34.5967 -24.5127 0.170599 1aml.pdb with G53a6 using
vsite=none and water=spc
12 -34.5967 -24.5127 0.170599 1aml.pdb with G53a6 using
vsite=none and water=spce
There were 2/45 differences in final energy with the reference file
pdb2gmx tests FAILED
This error is much larger than those for the other cases. Nothing in the
pdb2gmx/editconf/grompp/mdrun output would seem to account for it. Is
there a known reason for it?
*) I've added grompp4.mdp files generated by grompp 4.0.5 on the
original grompp.mdp file such that so long as one of grompp.mdp
and this file match mdout.mdp suitably, then the user is not prompted to
check the .mdp files.
*) complex/acetonitrileRF is broken by 3.3.2, since a buggy function in
src/mdlib/rf_util.c calls gmx_sumi without checking for MPI. 3.3 doesn't
call gmx_sumi, and 3.3.3 calls it after checking. I guessed to generate
the reference state with 3.3.3 for this test.
*) The complex tests tend to start with zero velocities, gen_vel = no,
and sometimes tcoupl = Berendsen, however there is no uniformity. Is
that a feature or a bug?
Mark
More information about the gromacs.org_gmx-developers
mailing list