pt: add exported methods to BaseAtomicModel

[njzjz]

No description provided.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: 29 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (6018e3c) 75.27% compared to head (612bedc) 75.22%.

Files	Patch %	Lines
deepmd/dpmodel/model/linear_atomic_model.py	40.00%	6 Missing ⚠️
deepmd/pt/model/model/linear_atomic_model.py	57.14%	6 Missing ⚠️
deepmd/dpmodel/model/dp_atomic_model.py	50.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
deepmd/dpmodel/model/pairtab_atomic_model.py	50.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
deepmd/pt/model/model/dp_atomic_model.py	66.66%	4 Missing ⚠️
deepmd/pt/model/model/pairtab_atomic_model.py	66.66%	4 Missing ⚠️
deepmd/pt/infer/deep_eval.py	66.66%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##            devel    #3258      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   75.27%   75.22%   -0.06%     
==========================================
  Files         373      373              
  Lines       33252    33327      +75     
  Branches     1604     1604              
==========================================
+ Hits        25031    25070      +39     
- Misses       7350     7386      +36     
  Partials      871      871              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[wanghan-iapcm]

It seems that these method should be abstract methods that are implemented by derived classes.

[njzjz]

It seems that these method should be abstract methods that are implemented by derived classes.

This means there is no default value for these models. Is it expected?

…

On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 5:11 AM Han Wang ***@***.***> wrote: ***@***.**** commented on this pull request. It seems that these method should be abstract methods that are implemented by derived classes. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#3258 (review)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACIOQ7TC5K475F3DA2UC4LLYTCKNZAVCNFSM6AAAAABDDDUU62VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMYTQNZUGMZTQOJZG4> . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[wanghan-iapcm]

It seems that these method should be abstract methods that are implemented by derived classes.
This means there is no default value for these models. Is it expected?
…
On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 5:11 AM Han Wang @.> wrote: @.* commented on this pull request. It seems that these method should be abstract methods that are implemented by derived classes. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#3258 (review)>, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACIOQ7TC5K475F3DA2UC4LLYTCKNZAVCNFSM6AAAAABDDDUU62VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMYTQNZUGMZTQOJZG4 . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: @.***>

I would suggest forcing the developers of an atomic model to implement the methods, otherwise it may be very difficult to debug when developers do not notice the interfaces.