ViewVC Help
View File | Revision Log | Show Annotations | View Changeset | Root Listing
root/group/trunk/multipole/multipole_2/multipole2.tex
(Generate patch)

Comparing trunk/multipole/multipole_2/multipole2.tex (file contents):
Revision 4168 by gezelter, Wed Jun 4 16:55:14 2014 UTC vs.
Revision 4170 by gezelter, Wed Jun 4 18:48:27 2014 UTC

# Line 377 | Line 377 | presented in the first paper in this series (Reference
377   Eq.~\ref{generic}, accounting for the appropriate number of
378   derivatives. Complete energy, force, and torque expressions are
379   presented in the first paper in this series (Reference
380 < \bibpunct{}{}{,}{n}{}{,} \protect\citep{PaperI}).
380 > \citep{PaperI}).
381  
382   \subsection{Gradient-shifted force (GSF)}
383  
# Line 426 | Line 426 | GSF potential are presented in the first paper in this
426   the energy, force and torque for higher order multipole-multipole
427   interactions. Complete energy, force, and torque expressions for the
428   GSF potential are presented in the first paper in this series
429 < (Reference \bibpunct{}{}{,}{n}{}{,} \protect\citep{PaperI})
429 > (Reference \citep{PaperI})
430  
431  
432   \subsection{Shifted potential (SP) }
# Line 459 | Line 459 | energy differences are the primary quantity of interes
459   may be suitable for Monte Carlo approaches where the configurational
460   energy differences are the primary quantity of interest.
461  
462 < \subsection{Self term}
462 > \subsection{The Self term}
463   In the TSF, GSF, and SP methods, a self-interaction is retained for
464   the central multipole interacting with its own image on the surface of
465   the cutoff sphere.  This self interaction is nearly identical with the
466   self-terms that arise in the Ewald sum for multipoles.  Complete
467   expressions for the self terms are presented in the first paper in
468 < this series (Reference \bibpunct{}{}{,}{n}{}{,}
469 < \protect\citep{PaperI})
468 > this series (Reference \citep{PaperI})  
469  
471 Note that the TSF, GSF, and SP models are $\mathcal{O}(N)$ methods
472 that can be made extremely efficient using spline interpolations of
473 the radial functions.  They require no Fourier transforms or $k$-space
474 sums, and guarantee the smooth handling of energies, forces, and
475 torques as multipoles cross the real-space cutoff boundary.  
470  
471 < \section{\label{sec:test}Test systems}
478 < We have compared the electrostatic force and torque of each molecule from SP, TSF and GSF method with the multipolar-Ewald method. Furthermore, total electrostatic energies of a molecular system from the different methods have also been compared with total energy from the Ewald. In Mote Carlo (MC) simulation, the energy difference between different configurations of the molecular system is important, even though absolute energies are not accurate. We have compared the change in electrostatic potential energy ($\triangle E$) of 250 different configurations of the various multipolar molecular systems (Section IV B) calculated from the Hard, SP, GSF, and TSF methods with the well-known Ewald method. In MD simulations, the force and torque acting on the molecules drives the whole dynamics of the molecules in a system. The magnitudes of the electrostatic force, torque and their direction for each molecule of the all 250 configurations have also been compared against the Ewald’s method.
471 > \section{\label{sec:methodology}Methodology}
472  
473 < \subsection{Modeled systems}
474 < We studied the comparison of the energy differences, forces and torques for six different systems; i) dipolar liquid, ii) quadrupolar liquid, iii)  dipolar crystal, iv) quadrupolar crystal v) dipolar-quadrupolar liquid(SSDQ), and vi) ions in dipolar-qudrupolar liquid(SSDQC). To simulate different configurations of the crystals, the body centered cubic (BCC) minimum energy crystal with 3,456 molecules was taken and translationally locked in their respective crystal sites. The thermal energy was supplied to the rotational motion so that dipoles or quadrupoles can freely explore all possible orientation. The crystals were simulated for 10,000 fs in NVE ensemble at 50 K and 250 different configurations was taken in equal time interval for the comparative study.  The crystals were not simulated at high temperature and for a long run time to avoid possible translational deformation of the crystal sites.
475 < For dipolar, quadrupolar, and dipolar-quadrupolar liquids simulation, each molecular system with 2,048 molecules simulated for 1ns in NVE ensemble at 300 K temperature after equilibration.  We collected 250 different configurations in equal interval of time. For the ions mixed liquid system, we converted 48 different molecules into 24 $Na^+$ and $24 Cl^-$ ions and equilibrated. After equilibration, the system was run at the same environment for 1ns and 250 configurations were collected. While comparing energies, forces, and torques with Ewald method, Lennad Jone’s potentials were turned off and purely electrostatic interaction had been compared.
473 > To understand how the real-space multipole methods behave in computer
474 > simulations, it is vital to test against established methods for
475 > computing electrostatic interactions in periodic systems, and to
476 > evaluate the size and sources of any errors that arise from the
477 > real-space cutoffs.  In the first paper of this series, we compared
478 > the dipolar and quadrupolar energy expressions against analytic
479 > expressions for ordered dipolar and quadrupolar
480 > arrays.\cite{Sauer,LT,Nagai01081960,Nagai01091963} This work uses the
481 > multipolar Ewald sum as a reference method for comparing energies,
482 > forces, and torques for molecular models that mimic disordered and
483 > ordered condensed-phase systems.  These test-cases include:
484  
485 < \subsection{Statistical analysis}
486 < We have used least square regression analyses for six different molecular systems to compare $\triangle E$ from Hard, SP, GSF, and TSF with the reference method. Molecular systems were run longer enough to explore various configurations and 250 independent configurations were recorded for comparison.  The total numbers of 31,125 energy differences from the proposed methods have been compared with the Ewald.  Similarly, the magnitudes of the forces and torques have also been compared by using least square regression analyses. In the forces and torques comparison, the magnitudes of the forces acting in each molecule for each configuration were evaluated. For example, our dipolar liquid simulation contains 2048 molecules and there are 250 different configurations for each system thus there are 512,000 force and torque comparisons.  The correlation coefficient and correlation slope varies from 0 to 1, where 1 is the best agreement between the two methods.
485 > \begin{itemize}
486 > \item Soft Dipolar fluids ($\sigma = , \epsilon = , |D| = $)
487 > \item Soft Dipolar solids ($\sigma = , \epsilon = , |D| = $)
488 > \item Soft Quadrupolar fluids ($\sigma = , \epsilon = , Q_{xx} = ...$)
489 > \item Soft Quadrupolar solids  ($\sigma = , \epsilon = , Q_{xx} = ...$)
490 > \item A mixed multipole model for water
491 > \item A mixed multipole models for water with dissolved ions
492 > \end{itemize}
493 > This last test case exercises all levels of the multipole-multipole
494 > interactions we have derived so far and represents the most complete
495 > test of the new methods.
496  
497 < \subsection{Analysis of vector quantities}
498 < R.A. Fisher has developed a probablity density function to analyse directional data sets is expressed as below,\cite{fisher53}
499 < \begin{equation}
500 < p_f(\theta) = \frac{\kappa}{2 \sinh\kappa}\sin\theta \exp(\kappa \cos\theta)
501 < \label{eq:pdf}
502 < \end{equation}
503 < where $\kappa$ measures directional dispersion of the data about mean direction can be estimated as a reciprocal of the circular variance for large number of directional data sets.\cite{Allen91} In our calculation, the unit vector from the Ewald method was considered as mean direction and the angle between the vectors from Ewald and the purposed method were evaluated.The total displacement of the unit vectors from the purposed method was calculated as,
497 > In the following section, we present results for the total
498 > electrostatic energy, as well as the electrostatic contributions to
499 > the force and torque on each molecule.  These quantities have been
500 > computed using the SP, TSF, and GSF methods, as well as a hard cutoff,
501 > and have been compared with the values obtaine from the multipolar
502 > Ewald sum.  In Mote Carlo (MC) simulations, the energy differences
503 > between two configurations is the primary quantity that governs how
504 > the simulation proceeds. These differences are the most imporant
505 > indicators of the reliability of a method even if the absolute
506 > energies are not exact.  For each of the multipolar systems listed
507 > above, we have compared the change in electrostatic potential energy
508 > ($\Delta E$) between 250 statistically-independent configurations.  In
509 > molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, the forces and torques govern the
510 > behavior of the simulation, so we also compute the electrostatic
511 > contributions to the forces and torques.
512 >
513 > \subsection{Model systems}
514 > To sample independent configurations of multipolar crystals, a body
515 > centered cubic (BCC) crystal which is a minimum energy structure for
516 > point dipoles was generated using 3,456 molecules.  The multipoles
517 > were translationally locked in their respective crystal sites for
518 > equilibration at a relatively low temperature (50K), so that dipoles
519 > or quadrupoles could freely explore all accessible orientations.  The
520 > translational constraints were removed, and the crystals were
521 > simulated for 10 ps in the microcanonical (NVE) ensemble with an
522 > average temperature of 50 K.  Configurations were sampled at equal
523 > time intervals for the comparison of the configurational energy
524 > differences.  The crystals were not simulated close to the melting
525 > points in order to avoid translational deformation away of the ideal
526 > lattice geometry.
527 >
528 > For dipolar, quadrupolar, and mixed-multipole liquid simulations, each
529 > system was created with 2048 molecules oriented randomly.  These were
530 >
531 > system with 2,048 molecules simulated for 1ns in NVE ensemble at 300 K
532 > temperature after equilibration.  We collected 250 different
533 > configurations in equal interval of time. For the ions mixed liquid
534 > system, we converted 48 different molecules into 24 \ce{Na+} and 24
535 > \ce{Cl-} ions and equilibrated. After equilibration, the system was run
536 > at the same environment for 1ns and 250 configurations were
537 > collected. While comparing energies, forces, and torques with Ewald
538 > method, Lennard-Jones potentials were turned off and purely
539 > electrostatic interaction had been compared.
540 >
541 > \subsection{Accuracy of Energy Differences, Forces and Torques}
542 > The pairwise summation techniques (outlined above) were evaluated for
543 > use in MC simulations by studying the energy differences between
544 > different configurations.  We took the Ewald-computed energy
545 > difference between two conformations to be the correct behavior. An
546 > ideal performance by one of the new methods would reproduce these
547 > energy differences exactly. The configurational energies being used
548 > here contain only contributions from electrostatic interactions.
549 > Lennard-Jones interactions were omitted from the comparison as they
550 > should be identical for all methods.
551 >
552 > Since none of the real-space methods provide exact energy differences,
553 > we used least square regressions analysiss for the six different
554 > molecular systems to compare $\Delta E$ from Hard, SP, GSF, and TSF
555 > with the multipolar Ewald reference method.  Unitary results for both
556 > the correlation (slope) and correlation coefficient for these
557 > regressions indicate perfect agreement between the real-space method
558 > and the multipolar Ewald sum.
559 >
560 > Molecular systems were run long enough to explore independent
561 > configurations and 250 configurations were recorded for comparison.
562 > Each system provided 31,125 energy differences for a total of 186,750
563 > data points.  Similarly, the magnitudes of the forces and torques have
564 > also been compared by using least squares regression analyses. In the
565 > forces and torques comparison, the magnitudes of the forces acting in
566 > each molecule for each configuration were evaluated. For example, our
567 > dipolar liquid simulation contains 2048 molecules and there are 250
568 > different configurations for each system resulting in 3,072,000 data
569 > points for comparison of forces and torques.
570 >
571 > \subsection{Analysis of vector quantities}
572 > Getting the magnitudes of the force and torque vectors correct is only
573 > part of the issue for carrying out accurate molecular dynamics
574 > simulations.  Because the real space methods reweight the different
575 > orientational contributions to the energies, it is also important to
576 > understand how the methods impact the \textit{directionality} of the
577 > force and torque vectors. Fisher developed a probablity density
578 > function to analyse directional data sets,
579   \begin{equation}
580 < R = \sqrt{(\sum\limits_{i=1}^N \sin\theta_i)^2 + (\sum\limits_{i=1}^N \sin\theta_i)^2}
580 > p_f(\theta) = \frac{\kappa}{2 \sinh\kappa}\sin\theta e^{\kappa \cos\theta}
581 > \label{eq:pdf}
582 > \end{equation}
583 > where $\kappa$ measures directional dispersion of the data around the
584 > mean direction.\cite{fisher53} This quantity $(\kappa)$ can be
585 > estimated as a reciprocal of the circular variance.\cite{Allen91} To
586 > quantify the directional error, forces obtained from the Ewald sum
587 > were taken as the mean (or correct) direction and the angle between
588 > the forces obtained via the Ewald sum and the real-space methods were
589 > evaluated,
590 > \begin{equation}
591 > \cos\theta_i =  \frac{\vec{f}_i^\mathrm{~Ewald} \cdot
592 >  \vec{f}_i^\mathrm{~GSF}}{\left|\vec{f}_i^\mathrm{~Ewald}\right| \left|\vec{f}_i^\mathrm{~GSF}\right|}
593 > \end{equation}
594 > The total angular displacement of the vectors was calculated as,
595 > \begin{equation}
596 > R = \sqrt{\left(\sum\limits_{i=1}^N \cos\theta_i\right)^2 + \left(\sum\limits_{i=1}^N \sin\theta_i\right)^2}
597   \label{eq:displacement}
598   \end{equation}
599 < where N is number of directional data sets and $theta_i$ are the angles between unit vectors evaluated from the Ewald and the purposed methods. The circular variance is defined as $ Var(\theta) = 1 -R/N$. The value of circular variance varies from 0 to 1. The lower the value of $Var{\theta}$ is higher the value of $\kappa$, which expresses tighter clustering of the direction sets around Ewald direction.
599 > where $N$ is number of force vectors.  The circular variance is
600 > defined as
601 > \begin{equation}
602 > \mathrm{Var}(\theta) \approx 1/\kappa = 1 - R/N
603 > \end{equation}
604 > The circular variance takes on values between from 0 to 1, with 0
605 > indicating a perfect directional match between the Ewald force vectors
606 > and the real-space forces. Lower values of $\mathrm{Var}(\theta)$
607 > correspond to higher values of $\kappa$, which indicates tighter
608 > clustering of the real-space force vectors around the Ewald forces.
609  
610 + A similar analysis was carried out for the electrostatic contribution
611 + to the molecular torques as well as forces.  
612 +
613   \subsection{Energy conservation}
614 < To test conservation of the energy, the mixed molecular system of 2000 dipolar-quadrupolar molecules with 24 $Na^+$,  and 24 $Cl^-$  was run for 1ns in the microcanonical ensemble at 300 K temperature for different cutoff methods (Ewald, Hard, SP, GSF, and TSF). The molecular system was run in 12 parallel computers and started with same initial positions and velocities for all cutoff methods. The slope and Standard Deviation of the energy about the slope (SD) were evaluated in the total energy versus time plot, where the slope evaluates the total energy drift and SD calculates the energy fluctuation in MD simulations. Also, the time duration for the simulation was recorded to compare efficiency of the purposed methods with the Ewald.
614 > To test conservation the energy for the methods, the mixed molecular
615 > system of 2000 SSDQ water molecules with 24 \ce{Na+} and 24 \ce{Cl-}
616 > ions was run for 1 ns in the microcanonical ensemble at an average
617 > temperature of 300K.  Each of the different electrostatic methods
618 > (Ewald, Hard, SP, GSF, and TSF) was tested for a range of different
619 > damping values. The molecular system was started with same initial
620 > positions and velocities for all cutoff methods. The energy drift
621 > ($\delta E_1$) and standard deviation of the energy about the slope
622 > ($\delta E_0$) were evaluated from the total energy of the system as a
623 > function of time.  Although both measures are valuable at
624 > investigating new methods for molecular dynamics, a useful interaction
625 > model must allow for long simulation times with minimal energy drift.
626  
627   \section{\label{sec:result}RESULTS}
628   \subsection{Configurational energy differences}
# Line 571 | Line 695 | In MD simulations, the energy conservation is very imp
695   \section{CONCLUSION}
696   We have generalized the charged neutralized potential energy originally developed by the Wolf et al.\cite{Wolf:1999dn} for the charge-charge interaction to the charge-multipole and multipole-multipole interaction in the SP method for higher order multipoles. Also, we have developed GSF and TSF methods by implementing the modification purposed by Fennel and Gezelter\cite{Fennell:2006lq} for the charge-charge interaction to the higher order multipoles to ensure consistency and smooth truncation of the electrostatic energy, force, and torque for the spherical truncation. The SP methods for multipoles proved its suitability in MC simulations. On the other hand, the results from the GSF method produced good agreement with the Ewald's energy, force, and torque. Also, it shows very good energy conservation in MD simulations.
697   The direct truncation of any molecular system without multipole neutralization creates the fluctuation in the electrostatic energy. This fluctuation in the energy is very large for the case of crystal because of long range of multipole ordering (Refer paper I).\cite{PaperI} This is also significant in the case of the liquid because of the local multipole ordering in the molecules. If the net multipole within cutoff radius neutralized within cutoff sphere by placing image multiples on the surface of the sphere, this fluctuation in the energy reduced significantly. Also, the multipole neutralization in the generalized SP method showed very good agreement with the Ewald as compared to direct truncation for the evaluation of the $\triangle E$ between the configurations.
698 < In MD simulations, the energy conservation is very important. The conservation of the total energy can be ensured by  i) enforcing the smooth truncation of the energy, force and torque in the cutoff radius and ii) making the energy, force and torque consistent with each other. The GSF and TSF methods ensure the consistency and smooth truncation of the energy, force and torque at the cutoff radius, as a result show very good total energy conservation. But the TSF method does not show good agreement in the absolute value of the electrostatic energy, force and torque with the Ewald.  The GSF method has mimicked Ewald’s force, energy and torque accurately and also conserved energy. Therefore, the GSF method is the suitable method for evaluating required force field in MD simulations. In addition, the energy drift and fluctuation from the GSF method is much better than Ewald’s method for finite-sized reciprocal space.
698 > In MD simulations, the energy conservation is very important. The
699 > conservation of the total energy can be ensured by  i) enforcing the
700 > smooth truncation of the energy, force and torque in the cutoff radius
701 > and ii) making the energy, force and torque consistent with each
702 > other. The GSF and TSF methods ensure the consistency and smooth
703 > truncation of the energy, force and torque at the cutoff radius, as a
704 > result show very good total energy conservation. But the TSF method
705 > does not show good agreement in the absolute value of the
706 > electrostatic energy, force and torque with the Ewald.  The GSF method
707 > has mimicked Ewald’s force, energy and torque accurately and also
708 > conserved energy. Therefore, the GSF method is the suitable method for
709 > evaluating required force field in MD simulations. In addition, the
710 > energy drift and fluctuation from the GSF method is much better than
711 > Ewald’s method for finite-sized reciprocal space.
712 >
713 > Note that the TSF, GSF, and SP models are $\mathcal{O}(N)$ methods
714 > that can be made extremely efficient using spline interpolations of
715 > the radial functions.  They require no Fourier transforms or $k$-space
716 > sums, and guarantee the smooth handling of energies, forces, and
717 > torques as multipoles cross the real-space cutoff boundary.  
718 >
719   %\bibliographystyle{aip}
720   \newpage
721   \bibliography{references}

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines