You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Deepmd training suggestion needed. I have uploaded plots and input.json
DeePMD-kit Version
3.1.1
Backend and its version
TensorFlow 2.19.1
Python Version, CUDA Version, GCC Version, LAMMPS Version, etc
No response
Details
After running deepmd with the input.json I get overall force plot training and validation but for energy different configuration consist different plots as different configuation has different energy. i am uploading plots, lcurve, and input.json.
This appears to be the same training/evaluation follow-up as #5950; the explanation there about separate energy plots also applies here. Different atom counts/compositions can give different total-energy ranges. Separate clusters alone do not establish a training failure, and combining Cartesian force components into one plot is fine.
Before changing the descriptor or network, please evaluate each held-out system separately:
Replace the model and system paths with yours. In your reported v3.1.1, -n 0 removes the frame-count cap on the selected test data. Use a directory containing the intended validation data so this does not accidentally evaluate a training split.
For each system, report the energy-per-atom and force RMSE, and plot the paired reference/prediction columns against y = x. Energy residuals (E_pred - E_ref)/N are more informative than whether different configurations share the same absolute energy range. Also verify identical atom ordering, type mapping, units, and frame alignment between coordinates and labels.
If validation_data.numb_btch is still 1 as in the earlier configuration, increasing it (e.g. to 100) can reduce noise in training-time monitoring; it does not change model capacity or replace the held-out evaluation. If both training and validation errors remain large, a useful next diagnostic is fitting roughly 100 unique frames from one system and evaluating those same frames. Keep the validation split independent, and perform any bootstrapping only after splitting.
I could not retrieve the attached JSON/learning-curve files from this review environment, so I cannot justify a specific learning-rate, cutoff, or loss-weight change from those attachments. Please put the per-system RMSE values and the relevant input sections in text, preferably continuing #5950 so the diagnosis stays in one thread.
Activity
njzjz-bot commentedon Oct 2, 2026
This appears to be the same training/evaluation follow-up as #5950; the explanation there about separate energy plots also applies here. Different atom counts/compositions can give different total-energy ranges. Separate clusters alone do not establish a training failure, and combining Cartesian force components into one plot is fine.
Before changing the descriptor or network, please evaluate each held-out system separately:
dp --tf test -m graph.pb -s /path/to/held_out_system -n 0 -d heldoutReplace the model and system paths with yours. In your reported v3.1.1,
-n 0removes the frame-count cap on the selected test data. Use a directory containing the intended validation data so this does not accidentally evaluate a training split.For each system, report the energy-per-atom and force RMSE, and plot the paired reference/prediction columns against
y = x. Energy residuals(E_pred - E_ref)/Nare more informative than whether different configurations share the same absolute energy range. Also verify identical atom ordering, type mapping, units, and frame alignment between coordinates and labels.If
validation_data.numb_btchis still 1 as in the earlier configuration, increasing it (e.g. to 100) can reduce noise in training-time monitoring; it does not change model capacity or replace the held-out evaluation. If both training and validation errors remain large, a useful next diagnostic is fitting roughly 100 unique frames from one system and evaluating those same frames. Keep the validation split independent, and perform any bootstrapping only after splitting.I could not retrieve the attached JSON/learning-curve files from this review environment, so I cannot justify a specific learning-rate, cutoff, or loss-weight change from those attachments. Please put the per-system RMSE values and the relevant input sections in text, preferably continuing #5950 so the diagnosis stays in one thread.
Coding agent: Codex
Codex version: codex-cli 0.160.0
Model: gpt-6-astra
Reasoning effort: xhigh
1997sankha commentedon Oct 3, 2026
input2.json
is this input file ok? or i have to check with other descriptors also?