Skip to content
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

Differences in the new solver #271

Open
K20shores opened this issue Oct 28, 2024 · 4 comments
Open

Differences in the new solver #271

K20shores opened this issue Oct 28, 2024 · 4 comments
Assignees
Labels
bug Something isn't working help wanted Extra attention is needed

Comments

@K20shores
Copy link
Collaborator

K20shores commented Oct 28, 2024

@SancyW pointed out differences in the result of her configuraitons between the micm-powered music box and the camp-powered music box

Below are some screenshots and configurations showing difference. New is on the left, old on the right

C1

configuration: config_0522_C1.zip
image

C2

configuration: config_0621_C2.zip
image
image
image
image
image

C3

configuration: config_0621_C3_perfect.zip
PastedGraphic-1
PastedGraphic-2

C4

configuration: config_0704_C4.zip
image
image
image
image
image

C5

configuration: config_C5_0730.zip
image
image
image

@K20shores K20shores added this to the Sancy's MusicBox Paper milestone Oct 28, 2024
@K20shores K20shores added bug Something isn't working help wanted Extra attention is needed labels Oct 28, 2024
@SancyW SancyW self-assigned this Oct 29, 2024
@K20shores
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I can recreate Sancy's differences using version v3.1.0 of the api and v2.4.0 of the client.

The emissions rate are really different. For some reason, the configuration I downloaded from the site in the old version adds an M to the reactants for the emission of CO. The difference in magnitude of the integrated reaction rate between the micm and camp versions is 10^2.

@SancyW
Copy link
Collaborator

SancyW commented Oct 29, 2024

Thanks! @K20shores Sounds like you've found the key problem! What about the reaction rate? Has it also changed? Is it related to the reaction CO + OH + M? I also added an M here.

@K20shores
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@SancyW, yes, that could be another difference. Adding an M would change the integrated reaction rate for that arrhenius reaction

@SancyW
Copy link
Collaborator

SancyW commented Oct 29, 2024

@K20shores That makes sense. A butterfly effect. Complicated non-linear impacts.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working help wanted Extra attention is needed
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants