Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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 support for PseudoDojo PAW pseudos (alternative) #42
Add support for PseudoDojo PAW pseudos (alternative) #42
Changes from 2 commits
99e3a66
a672dc7
699a49d
0ce2390
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If we are already taking the maximum of the stringency set, should we really even double it? Can't find your comment anymore about what the PD team recommended about cutoffs for lanthanides. I have the feeling this is a bit excessive. If we give a warning that they are not officially tested, maybe just using the max itself should be fine?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
They recommended 20 Ha as a rule of thumb, but they also mentioned that the density (PAW double grid) cutoff may need to be larger than what is generally required. As the elements that are missing are only the Lanthanides, it could make sense to do something "too strict" to be safe.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ok, but what is the max cutoff in the strict set? Is that more or less than 20 Ha. Because it if iis more, and we times two that, it will be a lot more than 20 Ha, so maybe a bit excessive.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the max in the strict set is 25, so I agree that 2.0 would be a bit extreme. Perhaps a lower multiplier would be better.