| Alex M |
We may have found the error in the asymmetric bicone. It appears there may have been two problems. First, the setup for the simulation_PEC.xmacro script in the asymmetric version appears to have been slightly different in that the positions of the cones, relative to the positions of the coordinate systems, are different from in the other versions of the loop. This was giving different uan and gain files than the previous runs did. We fixed this, but it revealed another potential issue: in order to evolve the separation distance, we need to make it so that the coordinate systems use the separation genes. This wasn't implemented in the asymmetric version, so there would have always been a disparity in the position of the cones relative to their coordinate systems when compared to the database version of the simulation_PEC.xmacro. I have a work around for when we don't evolve the separation distance, but if we want to evolve it we need to change this script.
Second, the version of Report.cc in AraSim on Eliot's user differed from the one in the database version. The other files agreed, so I copied our version into his directory and started a run with that. It's running now and should take ~1 hour before I can see if this has fully fixed the issue.
|
I might be out on Monday, but my main goal for next week is to see if the fixes we implemented today resolve the differences in effective volumes and evolved parameters. Once we have them in agreement, we can start a real run on the database version of the loop to get symmetric data for the paper. While that happens, we'll need to try fixing the asymmetric simulation_PEC script so that it can use the separation distances properly. Then we can test that again using those separation distance variables (I used a hardcoded value) to make sure we get correct results. After that we can merge the asymmetric branch with the database branch and then the database branch with master and get data for the asymmetric version of the loop. |