Skip to content

Conversation

@mattwthompson
Copy link
Member

@mattwthompson mattwthompson commented May 20, 2025

Closes #141

This code path is completely dependent on OpenEye. How has this not been a problem before?

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented May 20, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 40.00000% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 84.18%. Comparing base (20c2806) to head (5ab89b3).

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@mattwthompson mattwthompson marked this pull request as ready for review July 14, 2025 22:25
@mattwthompson
Copy link
Member Author

This is updated and ready for review, though I'm not sure how heavy a priority it is

)
for key in qm_points
)
/ len(qm_points),
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Note this detail - without which there were numeric differences, i.e. 24x for a scan of 24 grid points

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just noting that RMSD.from_data computes the RMS RMSD as opposed to the mean. Computing the mean is probably a better way to do it, but maybe RMSD.from_data should also be changed to use the mean? Should RMSD.from_data be used (and modified to have an include_hydrogens kwarg) instead of duplicating (a tiny bit)? Thanks.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good catch! Would the same suggestion also apply to RMSE.from_data?

rmse=numpy.sqrt(((qm_energies - mm_energies) ** 2).mean()),

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since this is not strictly related to the intent of the PR I'm going to split it out into a separate issue: #186

Copy link
Member

@j-wags j-wags left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I see this was demoted to draft - Dropping my one comment from my partial review for now. Happy to be assigned to review again once this is ready.

RMSD(
qcarchive_id=id,
rmsd=get_rmsd(molecule, qm, mm),
rmsd=get_rmsd(
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

(not blocking) It's quite confusing that get_rmsd is the name of both a function and a method (with different purposes/signatures) - could be a good thing to clean up/disambiguate in the code

@mattwthompson
Copy link
Member Author

There are some moving pieces in RMSD analysis; I'm tabling this to avoid diverging branches

@j-wags j-wags assigned mattwthompson and unassigned j-wags Jan 12, 2026
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.

Include hydrogens in RMSD calculations?

5 participants