Dear
Thank you very much, but how about this test:
Possible FAILURE: check FINAL_RESULTS_MMPBSA.dat.dif
/export/apps/amber111.4/test/mmpbsa_py
99c99
< EPB -3305.9807 18.9403
13.3928
---
> EPB -3305.9472 18.9343
13.3886
102,103c102,103
< G solv -3238.4981 18.9458
13.3967
< TOTAL -22209.0959 20.7614
14.6805
---
> G solv -3238.4646 18.9399
13.3925
> TOTAL -22209.0624 20.7673
14.6847
109c109
< EPB -3330.8514 16.7749
11.8617
---
> EPB -3330.9587 16.9716
12.0007
112,113c112,113
< G solv -3261.8320 16.7782
11.8640
< TOTAL -22129.0486 21.4524
15.1691
---
> G solv -3261.9392 16.9749
12.0031
> TOTAL -22129.1559 21.2557
15.0300
119c119
< EPB -35.6427 0.7251
0.5128
---
> EPB -35.6425 0.7250
0.5127
122,123c122,123
< G solv -32.3630 0.7252
0.5128
< TOTAL -40.8940 2.5242
1.7849
---
> G solv -32.3629 0.7251
0.5127
> TOTAL -40.8938 2.5240
1.7848
129c129
< EPB 60.5134 1.4402
1.0184
---
> EPB 60.6541 1.2377
0.8752
132,133c132,133
< DELTA G solv 55.6968 1.4468
1.0231
< DELTA G binding = -39.1533 +/- 1.8331
1.2962
---
> DELTA G solv 55.8376 1.2454
0.8806
> DELTA G binding = -39.0126 +/- 2.0356
1.4394
143c143
< EPB -3117.8743 24.7574
17.5061
---
> EPB -3117.8429 24.7544
17.5040
146,147c146,147
< G solv -3050.4486 24.7620
17.5093
< TOTAL -22126.5624 20.9106
14.7861
---
> G solv -3050.4172 24.7590
17.5072
> TOTAL -22126.5310 20.9136
14.7882
153c153
< EPB -3142.7956 22.7384
16.0785
---
> EPB -3142.7532 22.7234
16.0679
156,157c156,157
< G solv -3073.8330 22.7411
16.0804
< TOTAL -22046.9596 21.4998
15.2027
---
> G solv -3073.7906 22.7261
16.0698
> TOTAL -22046.9172 21.5149
15.2133
163c163
< EPB -35.6427 0.7251
0.5128
---
> EPB -35.6425 0.7250
0.5127
166,167c166,167
< G solv -32.3630 0.7252
0.5128
< TOTAL -40.8940 2.5242
1.7849
---
> G solv -32.3629 0.7251
0.5127
> TOTAL -40.8938 2.5240
1.7848
173c173
< EPB 60.5639 1.2938
0.9148
---
> EPB 60.5529 1.3060
0.9235
176,177c176,177
< DELTA G solv 55.7474 1.3011
0.9200
< DELTA G binding = -38.7089 +/- 1.9350
1.3683
---
> DELTA G solv 55.7364 1.3133
0.9286
> DELTA G binding = -38.7200 +/- 1.9228
1.3596
180c180
< RESULT OF ALANINE SCANNING: (D231A MUTANT:) DELTA DELTA G binding =
0.4443 +/- 2.6654
---
> RESULT OF ALANINE SCANNING: (D231A MUTANT:) DELTA DELTA G binding =
0.2926 +/- 2.8001
Do you think it safe for running?
With my best regard
Co
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Jason Swails <jason.swails.gmail.com>wrote:
> These are expected. The end of the log of AT15_Amber11.py says this:
>
> NOTE: Because PBSA has changed since Amber 11 was released, some
> tests are known to fail and others are known to quit in error. These
> can be safely ignored.
>
> Tests that error: Tests in $AMBERHOME/test/sander_pbsa_frc
> Run.argasp.min Run.dadt.min Run.dgdc.min
> Run.lysasp.min Run.polyALA.min Run.polyAT.min
> Run.argasp.min Run.dadt.min Run.dgdc.min
> Run.lysasp.min Run.polyALA.min Run.polyAT.min
> Run.argasp.min Run.dadt.min Run.dgdc.min
> Run.lysasp.min Run.polyALA.min Run.polyAT.min
>
> Tests that produce possible FAILUREs:
> cd sander_pbsa_ipb2 && ./Run.110D.min
> cd sander_pbsa_lpb && ./Run.lsolver.min (only some of them fail here)
> cd sander_pbsa_tsr && ./Run.tsrb.min
> cd sander_pbsa_decres && ./Run.pbsa_decres
> mm_pbsa.pl tests 02, 03, and 05
>
> HTH,
> Jason
>
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 4:16 AM, co nguyentruong <nguoithamdo.gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Sorry all, i forgot to attach logs file.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 4:14 PM, co nguyentruong <nguoithamdo.gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Dear
> > >
> > > we set up serial and parallel of two Amber11 versions in rock 5.4 and
> > > compiler is gcc-4-4 and use mpich for parallel installation . The first
> > one
> > > is version of Amber 11 and AmberTool 1.4 and second one is Amber11 and
> > > AmberTool 1.5. Their names are Amber1114 and Amber11_1.5 respectively.
> > > However, while almost of tests of Amber1114 got one possible failure,
> > > Amber11_1.5 got more possible failures. I attached log file of their
> test
> > > on our cluster. And some users bothered that my amber set up is not
> > > reliable. Should we use these installation for running ?
> > >
> > > Thank you very much
> > >
> > > Nguyen Truong Co
> > >
> > > Institute for Computational Science and Technology
> > >
> > > Ho Chi Minh City Viet Nam
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > AMBER mailing list
> > AMBER.ambermd.org
> > http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Jason M. Swails
> Quantum Theory Project,
> University of Florida
> Ph.D. Candidate
> 352-392-4032
> _______________________________________________
> AMBER mailing list
> AMBER.ambermd.org
> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
>
_______________________________________________
AMBER mailing list
AMBER.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
Received on Thu Nov 24 2011 - 05:00:05 PST