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

Implementation of COFFEE #300

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Implementation of COFFEE #300

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

pw0908
Copy link
Member

@pw0908 pw0908 commented Oct 2, 2024

This is an initial draft for an implementation of the COFFEE equation of state. I am following this paper for now: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2017.08.025 although we can switch to the latest ones done the line.

Some issues I've run into:

  • I found an analytical equation for ∫odr. Unfortunately, it is wildly unstable and diverges when shift=0 and xi1=xi2=-1,1. Im not sure if it could be written in a more stable way...
  • Propagating derivatives through O(w1,w2) requires that df_nf / dO=0. However, there are some subtleties with higher order derivatives.
  • For the moment, I can't reproduce the results from the paper. This is mainly because, as we increase density, the pressure does not become positive again (i.e. the dipolar interactions are too strong). I'm not sure why this might be.

Some things of note:

  • Instead of using trapezium rule, I used Gauss-Legendre since I felt that this would be more stable. I dont know if one is allowed to use it this way for multivariate functions.

@pw0908
Copy link
Member Author

pw0908 commented Oct 2, 2024

Things I can confirm are working:

  • ∫odr and ∫∫∫Odξ₁dξ₂dγ12 are both correct as I can reproduce the angular distribution functions from the paper.

@longemen3000
Copy link
Member

(test errors are unrelated and should be solved in the latest master)

@pw0908
Copy link
Member Author

pw0908 commented Oct 9, 2024

The 'typo' I think I found is within the definition of Omega from the paper. The paper says it should be 4*pi, but if we're integrating over the xi1, xi2 and gamma12 space, then the degeneracy should be 8pi. Substituting that in fixes everything (for low mu). At high mu, our solutions end up being different.

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.

2 participants