Skip to content

Conversation

PythonFZ
Copy link
Contributor

@PythonFZ PythonFZ commented Jun 5, 2025

  • tests

@PythonFZ PythonFZ linked an issue Jun 5, 2025 that may be closed by this pull request
@PythonFZ PythonFZ requested a review from M-R-Schaefer June 5, 2025 10:54
@M-R-Schaefer
Copy link
Contributor

thanks! does this just allow training without an AddData node or does it also fix the issue of copying IPSuite Atoms to the node directory?

@PythonFZ
Copy link
Contributor Author

PythonFZ commented Jun 5, 2025

thanks! does this just allow training without an AddData node or does it also fix the issue of copying IPSuite Atoms to the node directory?

It would also fix the issue with copying the data, by telling the apax node the path to the existing file. If the general concept of the Node is fine by you, I'll add some tests.

There is one alternative to this, I want to mention. We could disallow passing list[ase.Atoms] to the node and require a pre-training node, which saves the configurations to a file somewhere that apax then uses. This would simplify the node but would require two nodes then.

file = apax.nodes.FramesToFile(data: list[ase.Atoms] = ...)
apax.nodes.Apax(data_file = file.path)

I am not entirely sure which way I'd prefer. Benefits here would also be, given you have a selection from a very large file which might take long to read will be cahced in the FramesToFile node and changing model parameters would not affect it.

Copy link
Contributor

@M-R-Schaefer M-R-Schaefer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

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.

apax node: provide data path without copying the files
2 participants