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 4175 by gezelter, Fri Jun 6 16:01:36 2014 UTC vs.
Revision 4185 by gezelter, Sun Jun 15 00:18:18 2014 UTC

# Line 35 | Line 35 | preprint,
35   %\linenumbers\relax % Commence numbering lines
36   \usepackage{amsmath}
37   \usepackage{times}
38 < \usepackage{mathptm}
38 > \usepackage{mathptmx}
39   \usepackage{tabularx}
40   \usepackage[version=3]{mhchem}  % this is a great package for formatting chemical reactions
41   \usepackage{url}
# Line 69 | Line 69 | of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556}
69   \begin{abstract}
70    We have tested the real-space shifted potential (SP),
71    gradient-shifted force (GSF), and Taylor-shifted force (TSF) methods
72 <  for multipoles that were developed in the first paper in this series
73 <  against a reference method. The tests were carried out in a variety
74 <  of condensed-phase environments which were designed to test all
75 <  levels of the multipole-multipole interactions.  Comparisons of the
76 <  energy differences between configurations, molecular forces, and
77 <  torques were used to analyze how well the real-space models perform
78 <  relative to the more computationally expensive Ewald sum.  We have
79 <  also investigated the energy conservation properties of the new
80 <  methods in molecular dynamics simulations using all of these
81 <  methods. The SP method shows excellent agreement with
82 <  configurational energy differences, forces, and torques, and would
83 <  be suitable for use in Monte Carlo calculations.  Of the two new
84 <  shifted-force methods, the GSF approach shows the best agreement
85 <  with Ewald-derived energies, forces, and torques and exhibits energy
86 <  conservation properties that make it an excellent choice for
87 <  efficiently computing electrostatic interactions in molecular
88 <  dynamics simulations.
72 >  for multipole interactions that were developed in the first paper in
73 >  this series, using the multipolar Ewald sum as a reference
74 >  method. The tests were carried out in a variety of condensed-phase
75 >  environments which were designed to test all levels of the
76 >  multipole-multipole interactions.  Comparisons of the energy
77 >  differences between configurations, molecular forces, and torques
78 >  were used to analyze how well the real-space models perform relative
79 >  to the more computationally expensive Ewald treatment.  We have also
80 >  investigated the energy conservation properties of the new methods
81 >  in molecular dynamics simulations. The SP method shows excellent
82 >  agreement with configurational energy differences, forces, and
83 >  torques, and would be suitable for use in Monte Carlo calculations.
84 >  Of the two new shifted-force methods, the GSF approach shows the
85 >  best agreement with Ewald-derived energies, forces, and torques and
86 >  exhibits energy conservation properties that make it an excellent
87 >  choice for efficient computation of electrostatic interactions in
88 >  molecular dynamics simulations.
89   \end{abstract}
90  
91   %\pacs{Valid PACS appear here}% PACS, the Physics and Astronomy
92                               % Classification Scheme.
93 < \keywords{Electrostatics, Multipoles, Real-space}
93 > %\keywords{Electrostatics, Multipoles, Real-space}
94  
95   \maketitle
96  
97  
98   \section{\label{sec:intro}Introduction}
99   Computing the interactions between electrostatic sites is one of the
100 < most expensive aspects of molecular simulations, which is why there
101 < have been significant efforts to develop practical, efficient and
102 < convergent methods for handling these interactions. Ewald's method is
103 < perhaps the best known and most accurate method for evaluating
104 < energies, forces, and torques in explicitly-periodic simulation
105 < cells. In this approach, the conditionally convergent electrostatic
106 < energy is converted into two absolutely convergent contributions, one
107 < which is carried out in real space with a cutoff radius, and one in
108 < reciprocal space.\cite{Clarke:1986eu,Woodcock75}
100 > most expensive aspects of molecular simulations. There have been
101 > significant efforts to develop practical, efficient and convergent
102 > methods for handling these interactions. Ewald's method is perhaps the
103 > best known and most accurate method for evaluating energies, forces,
104 > and torques in explicitly-periodic simulation cells. In this approach,
105 > the conditionally convergent electrostatic energy is converted into
106 > two absolutely convergent contributions, one which is carried out in
107 > real space with a cutoff radius, and one in reciprocal
108 > space. BETTER CITATIONS\cite{Clarke:1986eu,Woodcock75}
109  
110   When carried out as originally formulated, the reciprocal-space
111   portion of the Ewald sum exhibits relatively poor computational
# Line 116 | Line 116 | Because of the artificial periodicity required for the
116   the computational cost from $O(N^2)$ down to $O(N \log
117   N)$.\cite{Takada93,Gunsteren94,Gunsteren95,Darden:1993pd,Essmann:1995pb}.
118  
119 < Because of the artificial periodicity required for the Ewald sum, the
120 < method may require modification to compute interactions for
119 > Because of the artificial periodicity required for the Ewald sum,
120   interfacial molecular systems such as membranes and liquid-vapor
121 < interfaces.\cite{Parry:1975if,Parry:1976fq,Clarke77,Perram79,Rhee:1989kl}
122 < To simulate interfacial systems, Parry’s extension of the 3D Ewald sum
123 < is appropriate for slab geometries.\cite{Parry:1975if} The inherent
124 < periodicity in the Ewald’s method can also be problematic for
125 < interfacial molecular systems.\cite{Fennell:2006lq} Modified Ewald
126 < methods that were developed to handle two-dimensional (2D)
127 < electrostatic interactions in interfacial systems have not had similar
128 < particle-mesh treatments.\cite{Parry:1975if, Parry:1976fq, Clarke77,
129 <  Perram79,Rhee:1989kl,Spohr:1997sf,Yeh:1999oq}
121 > interfaces require modifications to the
122 > method.\cite{Parry:1975if,Parry:1976fq,Clarke77,Perram79,Rhee:1989kl}
123 > Parry's extension of the three dimensional Ewald sum is appropriate
124 > for slab geometries.\cite{Parry:1975if} Modified Ewald methods that
125 > were developed to handle two-dimensional (2D) electrostatic
126 > interactions in interfacial systems have not seen similar
127 > particle-mesh treatments,\cite{Parry:1975if, Parry:1976fq, Clarke77,
128 >  Perram79,Rhee:1989kl,Spohr:1997sf,Yeh:1999oq} and still scale poorly
129 > with system size. The inherent periodicity in the Ewald’s method can
130 > also be problematic for interfacial molecular
131 > systems.\cite{Fennell:2006lq}
132  
133   \subsection{Real-space methods}
134   Wolf \textit{et al.}\cite{Wolf:1999dn} proposed a real space $O(N)$
135   method for calculating electrostatic interactions between point
136 < charges. They argued that the effective Coulomb interaction in
137 < condensed systems is actually short ranged.\cite{Wolf92,Wolf95}.  For
138 < an ordered lattice (e.g. when computing the Madelung constant of an
139 < ionic solid), the material can be considered as a set of ions
140 < interacting with neutral dipolar or quadrupolar ``molecules'' giving
141 < an effective distance dependence for the electrostatic interactions of
142 < $r^{-5}$ (see figure \ref{fig:NaCl}.  For this reason, careful
143 < applications of Wolf's method are able to obtain accurate estimates of
144 < Madelung constants using relatively short cutoff radii.  Recently,
145 < Fukuda used neutralization of the higher order moments for the
146 < calculation of the electrostatic interaction of the point charges
147 < system.\cite{Fukuda:2013sf}
136 > charges. They argued that the effective Coulomb interaction in most
137 > condensed phase systems is effectively short
138 > ranged.\cite{Wolf92,Wolf95} For an ordered lattice (e.g., when
139 > computing the Madelung constant of an ionic solid), the material can
140 > be considered as a set of ions interacting with neutral dipolar or
141 > quadrupolar ``molecules'' giving an effective distance dependence for
142 > the electrostatic interactions of $r^{-5}$ (see figure
143 > \ref{fig:schematic}). If one views the \ce{NaCl} crystal as a simple
144 > cubic (SC) structure with an octupolar \ce{(NaCl)4} basis, the
145 > electrostatic energy per ion converges more rapidly to the Madelung
146 > energy than the dipolar approximation.\cite{Wolf92} To find the
147 > correct Madelung constant, Lacman suggested that the NaCl structure
148 > could be constructed in a way that the finite crystal terminates with
149 > complete \ce{(NaCl)4} molecules.\cite{Lacman65} The central ion sees
150 > what is effectively a set of octupoles at large distances. These facts
151 > suggest that the Madelung constants are relatively short ranged for
152 > perfect ionic crystals.\cite{Wolf:1999dn} For this reason, careful
153 > application of Wolf's method are able to obtain accurate estimates of
154 > Madelung constants using relatively short cutoff radii.
155  
156 < \begin{figure}[h!]
156 > Direct truncation of interactions at a cutoff radius creates numerical
157 > errors.  Wolf \textit{et al.}  argued that truncation errors are due
158 > to net charge remaining inside the cutoff sphere.\cite{Wolf:1999dn} To
159 > neutralize this charge they proposed placing an image charge on the
160 > surface of the cutoff sphere for every real charge inside the cutoff.
161 > These charges are present for the evaluation of both the pair
162 > interaction energy and the force, although the force expression
163 > maintained a discontinuity at the cutoff sphere.  In the original Wolf
164 > formulation, the total energy for the charge and image were not equal
165 > to the integral of their force expression, and as a result, the total
166 > energy would not be conserved in molecular dynamics (MD)
167 > simulations.\cite{Zahn:2002hc} Zahn \textit{et al.}, and Fennel and
168 > Gezelter later proposed shifted force variants of the Wolf method with
169 > commensurate force and energy expressions that do not exhibit this
170 > problem.\cite{Fennell:2006lq} Related real-space methods were also
171 > proposed by Chen \textit{et
172 >  al.}\cite{Chen:2004du,Chen:2006ii,Denesyuk:2008ez,Rodgers:2006nw}
173 > and by Wu and Brooks.\cite{Wu:044107} Recently, Fukuda has used
174 > neutralization of the higher order moments for the calculation of the
175 > electrostatic interaction of the point charge
176 > systems.\cite{Fukuda:2013sf}
177 >
178 > \begin{figure}
179    \centering
180 <  \includegraphics[width=0.50 \textwidth]{chargesystem.pdf}
181 <  \caption{Top: NaCl crystal showing how spherical truncation can
182 <    breaking effective charge ordering, and how complete \ce{(NaCl)4}
183 <    molecules interact with the central ion.  Bottom: A dipolar
184 <    crystal exhibiting similar behavior and illustrating how the
185 <    effective dipole-octupole interactions can be disrupted by
186 <    spherical truncation.}
187 <  \label{fig:NaCl}
180 >  \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{schematic.pdf}
181 >  \caption{Top: Ionic systems exhibit local clustering of dissimilar
182 >    charges (in the smaller grey circle), so interactions are
183 >    effectively charge-multipole at longer distances.  With hard
184 >    cutoffs, motion of individual charges in and out of the cutoff
185 >    sphere can break the effective multipolar ordering.  Bottom:
186 >    dipolar crystals and fluids have a similar effective
187 >    \textit{quadrupolar} ordering (in the smaller grey circles), and
188 >    orientational averaging helps to reduce the effective range of the
189 >    interactions in the fluid.  Placement of reversed image multipoles
190 >    on the surface of the cutoff sphere recovers the effective
191 >    higher-order multipole behavior.}
192 >  \label{fig:schematic}
193   \end{figure}
194  
195 < The direct truncation of interactions at a cutoff radius creates
196 < truncation defects. Wolf \textit{et al.} further argued that
197 < truncation errors are due to net charge remaining inside the cutoff
198 < sphere.\cite{Wolf:1999dn} To neutralize this charge they proposed
199 < placing an image charge on the surface of the cutoff sphere for every
200 < real charge inside the cutoff.  These charges are present for the
201 < evaluation of both the pair interaction energy and the force, although
202 < the force expression maintained a discontinuity at the cutoff sphere.
203 < In the original Wolf formulation, the total energy for the charge and
204 < image were not equal to the integral of their force expression, and as
170 < a result, the total energy would not be conserved in molecular
171 < dynamics (MD) simulations.\cite{Zahn:2002hc} Zahn \textit{et al.} and
172 < Fennel and Gezelter later proposed shifted force variants of the Wolf
173 < method with commensurate force and energy expressions that do not
174 < exhibit this problem.\cite{Fennell:2006lq}   Related real-space
175 < methods were also proposed by Chen \textit{et
176 <  al.}\cite{Chen:2004du,Chen:2006ii,Denesyuk:2008ez,Rodgers:2006nw}
177 < and by Wu and Brooks.\cite{Wu:044107}
178 <
179 < Considering the interaction of one central ion in an ionic crystal
180 < with a portion of the crystal at some distance, the effective Columbic
181 < potential is found to be decreasing as $r^{-5}$. If one views the
182 < \ce{NaCl} crystal as simple cubic (SC) structure with an octupolar
183 < \ce{(NaCl)4} basis, the electrostatic energy per ion converges more
184 < rapidly to the Madelung energy than the dipolar
185 < approximation.\cite{Wolf92} To find the correct Madelung constant,
186 < Lacman suggested that the NaCl structure could be constructed in a way
187 < that the finite crystal terminates with complete \ce{(NaCl)4}
188 < molecules.\cite{Lacman65} Any charge in a NaCl crystal is surrounded
189 < by opposite charges. Similarly for each pair of charges, there is an
190 < opposite pair of charge adjacent to it.  The central ion sees what is
191 < effectively a set of octupoles at large distances. These facts suggest
192 < that the Madelung constants are relatively short ranged for perfect
193 < ionic crystals.\cite{Wolf:1999dn}
194 <
195 < One can make a similar argument for crystals of point multipoles. The
196 < Luttinger and Tisza treatment of energy constants for dipolar lattices
197 < utilizes 24 basis vectors that contain dipoles at the eight corners of
198 < a unit cube.  Only three of these basis vectors, $X_1, Y_1,
199 < \mathrm{~and~} Z_1,$ retain net dipole moments, while the rest have
200 < zero net dipole and retain contributions only from higher order
201 < multipoles.  The effective interaction between a dipole at the center
195 > One can make a similar effective range argument for crystals of point
196 > \textit{multipoles}. The Luttinger and Tisza treatment of energy
197 > constants for dipolar lattices utilizes 24 basis vectors that contain
198 > dipoles at the eight corners of a unit cube.  Only three of these
199 > basis vectors, $X_1, Y_1, \mathrm{~and~} Z_1,$ retain net dipole
200 > moments, while the rest have zero net dipole and retain contributions
201 > only from higher order multipoles.  The lowest energy crystalline
202 > structures are built out of basis vectors that have only residual
203 > quadrupolar moments (e.g. the $Z_5$ array). In these low energy
204 > structures, the effective interaction between a dipole at the center
205   of a crystal and a group of eight dipoles farther away is
206   significantly shorter ranged than the $r^{-3}$ that one would expect
207   for raw dipole-dipole interactions.  Only in crystals which retain a
# Line 208 | Line 211 | multipolar arrangements (see Fig. \ref{fig:NaCl}), cau
211   unstable.
212  
213   In ionic crystals, real-space truncation can break the effective
214 < multipolar arrangements (see Fig. \ref{fig:NaCl}), causing significant
215 < swings in the electrostatic energy as the cutoff radius is increased
216 < (or as individual ions move back and forth across the boundary).  This
217 < is why the image charges were necessary for the Wolf sum to exhibit
218 < rapid convergence.  Similarly, the real-space truncation of point
219 < multipole interactions breaks higher order multipole arrangements, and
220 < image multipoles are required for real-space treatments of
218 < electrostatic energies.
214 > multipolar arrangements (see Fig. \ref{fig:schematic}), causing
215 > significant swings in the electrostatic energy as individual ions move
216 > back and forth across the boundary.  This is why the image charges are
217 > necessary for the Wolf sum to exhibit rapid convergence.  Similarly,
218 > the real-space truncation of point multipole interactions breaks
219 > higher order multipole arrangements, and image multipoles are required
220 > for real-space treatments of electrostatic energies.
221  
222 + The shorter effective range of electrostatic interactions is not
223 + limited to perfect crystals, but can also apply in disordered fluids.
224 + Even at elevated temperatures, there is, on average, local charge
225 + balance in an ionic liquid, where each positive ion has surroundings
226 + dominated by negaitve ions and vice versa.  The reversed-charge images
227 + on the cutoff sphere that are integral to the Wolf and DSF approaches
228 + retain the effective multipolar interactions as the charges traverse
229 + the cutoff boundary.
230 +
231 + In multipolar fluids (see Fig. \ref{fig:schematic}) there is
232 + significant orientational averaging that additionally reduces the
233 + effect of long-range multipolar interactions.  The image multipoles
234 + that are introduced in the TSF, GSF, and SP methods mimic this effect
235 + and reduce the effective range of the multipolar interactions as
236 + interacting molecules traverse each other's cutoff boundaries.
237 +
238   % Because of this reason, although the nature of electrostatic
239   % interaction short ranged, the hard cutoff sphere creates very large
240   % fluctuation in the electrostatic energy for the perfect crystal. In
# Line 240 | Line 258 | The damping function used in our research has been dis
258   densities.\cite{Shi:2013ij,Kannam:2012rr,Acevedo13,Space12,English08,Lawrence13,Vergne13}
259  
260   \subsection{The damping function}
261 < The damping function used in our research has been discussed in detail
262 < in the first paper of this series.\cite{PaperI} The radial kernel
263 < $1/r$ for the interactions between point charges can be replaced by
264 < the complementary error function $\mathrm{erfc}(\alpha r)/r$ to
265 < accelerate the rate of convergence, where $\alpha$ is a damping
266 < parameter with units of inverse distance.  Altering the value of
267 < $\alpha$ is equivalent to changing the width of Gaussian charge
268 < distributions that replace each point charge -- Gaussian overlap
269 < integrals yield complementary error functions when truncated at a
270 < finite distance.
261 > The damping function has been discussed in detail in the first paper
262 > of this series.\cite{PaperI} The $1/r$ Coulombic kernel for the
263 > interactions between point charges can be replaced by the
264 > complementary error function $\mathrm{erfc}(\alpha r)/r$ to accelerate
265 > convergence, where $\alpha$ is a damping parameter with units of
266 > inverse distance.  Altering the value of $\alpha$ is equivalent to
267 > changing the width of Gaussian charge distributions that replace each
268 > point charge, as Coulomb integrals with Gaussian charge distributions
269 > produce complementary error functions when truncated at a finite
270 > distance.
271  
272 < By using suitable value of damping alpha ($\alpha \sim 0.2$) for a
273 < cutoff radius ($r_{­c}=9 A$), Fennel and Gezelter produced very good
274 < agreement with SPME for the interaction energies, forces and torques
275 < for charge-charge interactions.\cite{Fennell:2006lq}
272 > With moderate damping coefficients, $\alpha \sim 0.2$, the DSF method
273 > produced very good agreement with SPME for interaction energies,
274 > forces and torques for charge-charge
275 > interactions.\cite{Fennell:2006lq}
276  
277   \subsection{Point multipoles in molecular modeling}
278   Coarse-graining approaches which treat entire molecular subsystems as
279   a single rigid body are now widely used. A common feature of many
280   coarse-graining approaches is simplification of the electrostatic
281   interactions between bodies so that fewer site-site interactions are
282 < required to compute configurational energies.  Many coarse-grained
283 < molecular structures would normally consist of equal positive and
266 < negative charges, and rather than use multiple site-site interactions,
267 < the interaction between higher order multipoles can also be used to
268 < evaluate a single molecule-molecule
269 < interaction.\cite{Ren06,Essex10,Essex11}
282 > required to compute configurational
283 > energies.\cite{Ren06,Essex10,Essex11}
284  
285   Because electrons in a molecule are not localized at specific points,
286 < the assignment of partial charges to atomic centers is a relatively
287 < rough approximation.  Atomic sites can also be assigned point
288 < multipoles and polarizabilities to increase the accuracy of the
289 < molecular model.  Recently, water has been modeled with point
290 < multipoles up to octupolar
291 < order.\cite{Ichiye10_1,Ichiye10_2,Ichiye10_3} Atom-centered point
286 > the assignment of partial charges to atomic centers is always an
287 > approximation.  Atomic sites can also be assigned point multipoles and
288 > polarizabilities to increase the accuracy of the molecular model.
289 > Recently, water has been modeled with point multipoles up to octupolar
290 > order using the soft sticky dipole-quadrupole-octupole (SSDQO)
291 > model.\cite{Ichiye10_1,Ichiye10_2,Ichiye10_3} Atom-centered point
292   multipoles up to quadrupolar order have also been coupled with point
293   polarizabilities in the high-quality AMOEBA and iAMOEBA water
294 < models.\cite{Ren:2003uq,Ren:2004kx,Ponder:2010vl,Wang:2013fk}.  But
295 < using point multipole with the real space truncation without
296 < accounting for multipolar neutrality will create energy conservation
283 < issues in molecular dynamics (MD) simulations.
294 > models.\cite{Ren:2003uq,Ren:2004kx,Ponder:2010vl,Wang:2013fk} However,
295 > truncating point multipoles without smoothing the forces and torques
296 > will create energy conservation issues in molecular dynamics simulations.
297  
298   In this paper we test a set of real-space methods that were developed
299   for point multipolar interactions.  These methods extend the damped
# Line 317 | Line 330 | where the multipole operator for site $\bf a$,
330   \begin{equation}
331   U_{\bf{ab}}(r)=\hat{M}_{\bf a} \hat{M}_{\bf b} \frac{1}{r}  \label{kernel}.
332   \end{equation}
333 < where the multipole operator for site $\bf a$,
334 < \begin{equation}
335 < \hat{M}_{\bf a} = C_{\bf a} - D_{{\bf a}\alpha} \frac{\partial}{\partial r_{\alpha}}
336 < +  Q_{{\bf a}\alpha\beta}
324 < \frac{\partial^2}{\partial r_{\alpha} \partial r_{\beta}} + \dots
325 < \end{equation}
326 < is expressed in terms of the point charge, $C_{\bf a}$, dipole,
327 < $D_{{\bf a}\alpha}$, and quadrupole, $Q_{{\bf a}\alpha\beta}$, for
328 < object $\bf a$.  Note that in this work, we use the primitive
329 < quadrupole tensor, $Q_{a\alpha,\beta}=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{k\;in\;a}q_k
330 < r_{k\alpha}r_{k\beta}$ to represent point quadrupoles on a site.
333 > where the multipole operator for site $\bf a$, $\hat{M}_{\bf a}$, is
334 > expressed in terms of the point charge, $C_{\bf a}$, dipole, ${\bf D}_{\bf
335 >    a}$, and quadrupole, $\mathbf{Q}_{\bf a}$, for object
336 > $\bf a$, etc.
337  
338 < Interactions between multipoles can be expressed as higher derivatives
339 < of the bare Coulomb potential, so one way of ensuring that the forces
340 < and torques vanish at the cutoff distance is to include a larger
341 < number of terms in the truncated Taylor expansion, e.g.,
342 < %
343 < \begin{equation}
344 < f_n^{\text{shift}}(r)=\sum_{m=0}^{n+1} \frac {(r-r_c)^m}{m!} f^{(m)} \Big \lvert  _{r_c}  .
345 < \end{equation}
346 < %
347 < The combination of $f(r)$ with the shifted function is denoted $f_n(r)=f(r)-f_n^{\text{shift}}(r)$.
348 < Thus, for $f(r)=1/r$, we find
349 < %
350 < \begin{equation}
351 < f_1(r)=\frac{1}{r}- \frac{1}{r_c} + (r - r_c) \frac{1}{r_c^2} - \frac{(r-r_c)^2}{r_c^3} .
352 < \end{equation}
353 < This function is an approximate electrostatic potential that has
354 < vanishing second derivatives at the cutoff radius, making it suitable
355 < for shifting the forces and torques of charge-dipole interactions.
338 > % Interactions between multipoles can be expressed as higher derivatives
339 > % of the bare Coulomb potential, so one way of ensuring that the forces
340 > % and torques vanish at the cutoff distance is to include a larger
341 > % number of terms in the truncated Taylor expansion, e.g.,
342 > % %
343 > % \begin{equation}
344 > % f_n^{\text{shift}}(r)=\sum_{m=0}^{n+1} \frac {(r-r_c)^m}{m!} f^{(m)} \Big \lvert  _{r_c}  .
345 > % \end{equation}
346 > % %
347 > % The combination of $f(r)$ with the shifted function is denoted $f_n(r)=f(r)-f_n^{\text{shift}}(r)$.
348 > % Thus, for $f(r)=1/r$, we find
349 > % %
350 > % \begin{equation}
351 > % f_1(r)=\frac{1}{r}- \frac{1}{r_c} + (r - r_c) \frac{1}{r_c^2} - \frac{(r-r_c)^2}{r_c^3} .
352 > % \end{equation}
353 > % This function is an approximate electrostatic potential that has
354 > % vanishing second derivatives at the cutoff radius, making it suitable
355 > % for shifting the forces and torques of charge-dipole interactions.
356  
357 < In general, the TSF potential for any multipole-multipole interaction
358 < can be written
357 > The TSF potential for any multipole-multipole interaction can be
358 > written
359   \begin{equation}
360   U^{\text{TSF}}= (\text{prefactor}) (\text{derivatives}) f_n(r)
361   \label{generic}
362   \end{equation}
363 < with $n=0$ for charge-charge, $n=1$ for charge-dipole, $n=2$ for
364 < charge-quadrupole and dipole-dipole, $n=3$ for dipole-quadrupole, and
365 < $n=4$ for quadrupole-quadrupole.  To ensure smooth convergence of the
366 < energy, force, and torques, the required number of terms from Taylor
367 < series expansion in $f_n(r)$ must be performed for different
368 < multipole-multipole interactions.
363 > where $f_n(r)$ is a shifted kernel that is appropriate for the order
364 > of the interaction (see Ref. \onlinecite{PaperI}), with $n=0$ for
365 > charge-charge, $n=1$ for charge-dipole, $n=2$ for charge-quadrupole
366 > and dipole-dipole, $n=3$ for dipole-quadrupole, and $n=4$ for
367 > quadrupole-quadrupole.  To ensure smooth convergence of the energy,
368 > force, and torques, a Taylor expansion with $n$ terms must be
369 > performed at cutoff radius ($r_c$) to obtain $f_n(r)$.
370  
371 < To carry out the same procedure for a damped electrostatic kernel, we
372 < replace $1/r$ in the Coulomb potential with $\text{erfc}(\alpha r)/r$.
373 < Many of the derivatives of the damped kernel are well known from
374 < Smith's early work on multipoles for the Ewald
375 < summation.\cite{Smith82,Smith98}
371 > % To carry out the same procedure for a damped electrostatic kernel, we
372 > % replace $1/r$ in the Coulomb potential with $\text{erfc}(\alpha r)/r$.
373 > % Many of the derivatives of the damped kernel are well known from
374 > % Smith's early work on multipoles for the Ewald
375 > % summation.\cite{Smith82,Smith98}
376  
377 < Note that increasing the value of $n$ will add additional terms to the
378 < electrostatic potential, e.g., $f_2(r)$ includes orders up to
379 < $(r-r_c)^3/r_c^4$, and so on.  Successive derivatives of the $f_n(r)$
380 < functions are denoted $g_2(r) = f^\prime_2(r)$, $h_2(r) =
381 < f^{\prime\prime}_2(r)$, etc.  These higher derivatives are required
382 < for computing multipole energies, forces, and torques, and smooth
383 < cutoffs of these quantities can be guaranteed as long as the number of
384 < terms in the Taylor series exceeds the derivative order required.
377 > % Note that increasing the value of $n$ will add additional terms to the
378 > % electrostatic potential, e.g., $f_2(r)$ includes orders up to
379 > % $(r-r_c)^3/r_c^4$, and so on.  Successive derivatives of the $f_n(r)$
380 > % functions are denoted $g_2(r) = f^\prime_2(r)$, $h_2(r) =
381 > % f^{\prime\prime}_2(r)$, etc.  These higher derivatives are required
382 > % for computing multipole energies, forces, and torques, and smooth
383 > % cutoffs of these quantities can be guaranteed as long as the number of
384 > % terms in the Taylor series exceeds the derivative order required.
385  
386   For multipole-multipole interactions, following this procedure results
387 < in separate radial functions for each distinct orientational
388 < contribution to the potential, and ensures that the forces and torques
389 < from {\it each} of these contributions will vanish at the cutoff
390 < radius.  For example, the direct dipole dot product ($\mathbf{D}_{i}
391 < \cdot \mathbf{D}_{j}$) is treated differently than the dipole-distance
387 > in separate radial functions for each of the distinct orientational
388 > contributions to the potential, and ensures that the forces and
389 > torques from each of these contributions will vanish at the cutoff
390 > radius.  For example, the direct dipole dot product
391 > ($\mathbf{D}_{\bf a}
392 > \cdot \mathbf{D}_{\bf b}$) is treated differently than the dipole-distance
393   dot products:
394   \begin{equation}
395 < U_{D_{i}D_{j}}(r)= -\frac{1}{4\pi \epsilon_0} \left( \mathbf{D}_{i} \cdot
396 < \mathbf{D}_{j} \right) \frac{g_2(r)}{r}
397 < -\frac{1}{4\pi \epsilon_0}
398 < \left( \mathbf{D}_{i} \cdot \hat{r} \right)
399 < \left( \mathbf{D}_{j} \cdot \hat{r} \right) \left(h_2(r) -
392 <  \frac{g_2(r)}{r} \right)
395 > U_{D_{\bf a}D_{\bf b}}(r)= -\frac{1}{4\pi \epsilon_0} \left[ \left(
396 >  \mathbf{D}_{\bf a} \cdot
397 > \mathbf{D}_{\bf b} \right) v_{21}(r) +
398 > \left( \mathbf{D}_{\bf a} \cdot \hat{r} \right)
399 > \left( \mathbf{D}_{\bf b} \cdot \hat{r} \right) v_{22}(r) \right]
400   \end{equation}
401  
402 < The electrostatic forces and torques acting on the central multipole
403 < site due to another site within cutoff sphere are derived from
402 > For the Taylor shifted (TSF) method with the undamped kernel,
403 > $v_{21}(r) = -\frac{1}{r^3} + \frac{3 r}{r_c^4} - \frac{8}{r_c^3} +
404 > \frac{6}{r r_c^2}$ and $v_{22}(r) = \frac{3}{r^3} + \frac{3 r}{r_c^4}
405 > - \frac{6}{r r_c^2}$.  In these functions, one can easily see the
406 > connection to unmodified electrostatics as well as the smooth
407 > transition to zero in both these functions as $r\rightarrow r_c$.  The
408 > electrostatic forces and torques acting on the central multipole due
409 > to another site within the cutoff sphere are derived from
410   Eq.~\ref{generic}, accounting for the appropriate number of
411   derivatives. Complete energy, force, and torque expressions are
412   presented in the first paper in this series (Reference
# Line 401 | Line 414 | A second (and significantly simpler) method involves s
414  
415   \subsection{Gradient-shifted force (GSF)}
416  
417 < A second (and significantly simpler) method involves shifting the
418 < gradient of the raw coulomb potential for each particular multipole
417 > A second (and conceptually simpler) method involves shifting the
418 > gradient of the raw Coulomb potential for each particular multipole
419   order.  For example, the raw dipole-dipole potential energy may be
420   shifted smoothly by finding the gradient for two interacting dipoles
421   which have been projected onto the surface of the cutoff sphere
422   without changing their relative orientation,
423 < \begin{displaymath}
424 < U_{D_{i}D_{j}}(r_{ij})  = U_{D_{i}D_{j}}(r_{ij}) - U_{D_{i}D_{j}}(r_c)
425 <   - (r_{ij}-r_c) \hat{r}_{ij} \cdot
426 <  \vec{\nabla} V_{D_{i}D_{j}}(r) \Big \lvert _{r_c}
427 < \end{displaymath}
428 < Here the lab-frame orientations of the two dipoles, $\mathbf{D}_{i}$
429 < and $\mathbf{D}_{j}$, are retained at the cutoff distance (although
430 < the signs are reversed for the dipole that has been projected onto the
431 < cutoff sphere).  In many ways, this simpler approach is closer in
432 < spirit to the original shifted force method, in that it projects a
433 < neutralizing multipole (and the resulting forces from this multipole)
434 < onto a cutoff sphere. The resulting functional forms for the
435 < potentials, forces, and torques turn out to be quite similar in form
436 < to the Taylor-shifted approach, although the radial contributions are
437 < significantly less perturbed by the Gradient-shifted approach than
438 < they are in the Taylor-shifted method.
423 > \begin{equation}
424 > U_{D_{\bf a}D_{\bf b}}(r)  = U_{D_{\bf a}D_{\bf b}}(r) -
425 > U_{D_{\bf a} D_{\bf b}}(r_c)
426 >   - (r_{ab}-r_c) ~~~\hat{r}_{ab} \cdot
427 >  \nabla U_{D_{\bf a}D_{\bf b}}(r_c).
428 > \end{equation}
429 > Here the lab-frame orientations of the two dipoles, $\mathbf{D}_{\bf
430 >  a}$ and $\mathbf{D}_{\bf b}$, are retained at the cutoff distance
431 > (although the signs are reversed for the dipole that has been
432 > projected onto the cutoff sphere).  In many ways, this simpler
433 > approach is closer in spirit to the original shifted force method, in
434 > that it projects a neutralizing multipole (and the resulting forces
435 > from this multipole) onto a cutoff sphere. The resulting functional
436 > forms for the potentials, forces, and torques turn out to be quite
437 > similar in form to the Taylor-shifted approach, although the radial
438 > contributions are significantly less perturbed by the gradient-shifted
439 > approach than they are in the Taylor-shifted method.
440  
441 + For the gradient shifted (GSF) method with the undamped kernel,
442 + $v_{21}(r) = -\frac{1}{r^3} + \frac{3 r}{r_c^4} + \frac{4}{r_c^3}$ and
443 + $v_{22}(r) = \frac{3}{r^3} + \frac{9 r}{r_c^4} - \frac{12}{r_c^3}$.
444 + Again, these functions go smoothly to zero as $r\rightarrow r_c$, and
445 + because the Taylor expansion retains only one term, they are
446 + significantly less perturbed than the TSF functions.
447 +
448   In general, the gradient shifted potential between a central multipole
449   and any multipolar site inside the cutoff radius is given by,
450   \begin{equation}
451 < U^{\text{GSF}} = \sum \left[ U(\mathbf{r}, \hat{\mathbf{a}}, \hat{\mathbf{b}}) -
452 < U(\mathbf{r}_c,\hat{\mathbf{a}}, \hat{\mathbf{b}}) - (r-r_c) \hat{r}
453 < \cdot \nabla U(\mathbf{r},\hat{\mathbf{a}}, \hat{\mathbf{b}}) \Big \lvert  _{r_c} \right]
451 >  U^{\text{GSF}} = \sum \left[ U(\mathbf{r}, \hat{\mathbf{a}}, \hat{\mathbf{b}}) -
452 >    U(r_c \hat{\mathbf{r}},\hat{\mathbf{a}}, \hat{\mathbf{b}}) - (r-r_c) \hat{\mathbf{r}}
453 >    \cdot \nabla U(r_c \hat{\mathbf{r}},\hat{\mathbf{a}}, \hat{\mathbf{b}}) \right]
454   \label{generic2}
455   \end{equation}
456   where the sum describes a separate force-shifting that is applied to
457 < each orientational contribution to the energy.
457 > each orientational contribution to the energy.  In this expression,
458 > $\hat{\mathbf{r}}$ is the unit vector connecting the two multipoles
459 > ($a$ and $b$) in space, and $\hat{\mathbf{a}}$ and $\hat{\mathbf{b}}$
460 > represent the orientations the multipoles.
461  
462   The third term converges more rapidly than the first two terms as a
463   function of radius, hence the contribution of the third term is very
464   small for large cutoff radii.  The force and torque derived from
465 < equation \ref{generic2} are consistent with the energy expression and
465 > Eq. \ref{generic2} are consistent with the energy expression and
466   approach zero as $r \rightarrow r_c$.  Both the GSF and TSF methods
467   can be considered generalizations of the original DSF method for
468   higher order multipole interactions. GSF and TSF are also identical up
# Line 446 | Line 470 | GSF potential are presented in the first paper in this
470   the energy, force and torque for higher order multipole-multipole
471   interactions. Complete energy, force, and torque expressions for the
472   GSF potential are presented in the first paper in this series
473 < (Reference~\onlinecite{PaperI})
473 > (Reference~\onlinecite{PaperI}).
474  
475  
476   \subsection{Shifted potential (SP) }
# Line 459 | Line 483 | U_{SP}(\vec r)=\sum U(\vec r) - U(\vec r_c)
483   interactions with the central multipole and the image. This
484   effectively shifts the total potential to zero at the cutoff radius,
485   \begin{equation}
486 < U_{SP}(\vec r)=\sum U(\vec r) - U(\vec r_c)
486 > U^{\text{SP}} = \sum \left[ U(\mathbf{r}, \hat{\mathbf{a}}, \hat{\mathbf{b}}) -
487 > U(r_c \hat{\mathbf{r}},\hat{\mathbf{a}}, \hat{\mathbf{b}}) \right]
488   \label{eq:SP}
489   \end{equation}          
490   where the sum describes separate potential shifting that is done for
# Line 471 | Line 496 | The potential energy between a central multipole and o
496   multipoles that reorient after leaving the cutoff sphere can re-enter
497   the cutoff sphere without perturbing the total energy.
498  
499 < The potential energy between a central multipole and other multipolar
500 < sites then goes smoothly to zero as $r \rightarrow r_c$. However, the
501 < force and torque obtained from the shifted potential (SP) are
502 < discontinuous at $r_c$. Therefore, MD simulations will still
503 < experience energy drift while operating under the SP potential, but it
504 < may be suitable for Monte Carlo approaches where the configurational
505 < energy differences are the primary quantity of interest.
499 > For the shifted potential (SP) method with the undamped kernel,
500 > $v_{21}(r) = -\frac{1}{r^3} + \frac{1}{r_c^3}$ and $v_{22}(r) =
501 > \frac{3}{r^3} - \frac{3}{r_c^3}$.  The potential energy between a
502 > central multipole and other multipolar sites goes smoothly to zero as
503 > $r \rightarrow r_c$.  However, the force and torque obtained from the
504 > shifted potential (SP) are discontinuous at $r_c$.  MD simulations
505 > will still experience energy drift while operating under the SP
506 > potential, but it may be suitable for Monte Carlo approaches where the
507 > configurational energy differences are the primary quantity of
508 > interest.
509  
510 < \subsection{The Self term}
510 > \subsection{The Self Term}
511   In the TSF, GSF, and SP methods, a self-interaction is retained for
512   the central multipole interacting with its own image on the surface of
513   the cutoff sphere.  This self interaction is nearly identical with the
# Line 501 | Line 529 | in the test-cases are given in table~\ref{tab:pars}.
529   used the multipolar Ewald sum as a reference method for comparing
530   energies, forces, and torques for molecular models that mimic
531   disordered and ordered condensed-phase systems.  The parameters used
532 < in the test-cases are given in table~\ref{tab:pars}.
532 > in the test cases are given in table~\ref{tab:pars}.
533  
534   \begin{table}
535   \label{tab:pars}
# Line 519 | Line 547 | in the test-cases are given in table~\ref{tab:pars}.
547   & (\AA) & (kcal/mol) & (e) & (debye) & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{(debye \AA)} & (amu) & \multicolumn{3}{c}{(amu
548   \AA\textsuperscript{2})} \\ \hline
549      Soft Dipolar fluid & 3.051 & 0.152 &  & 2.35 & & & & 18.0153 & 1.77&0.6145& 1.155 \\
550 <    Soft Dipolar solid & 2.837 & 1.0   &  & 2.35 & & & & 10,000  & 17.6 &17.6 & 0 \\
550 >    Soft Dipolar solid & 2.837 & 1.0   &  & 2.35 & & & & $10^4$  & 17.6 &17.6 & 0 \\
551   Soft Quadrupolar fluid & 3.051 & 0.152 &  &  & -1&-1&-2.5 & 18.0153 & 1.77&0.6145&1.155  \\
552 < Soft Quadrupolar solid & 2.837 & 1.0   &  &  & -1&-1&-2.5 & 10,000  & 17.6&17.6&0 \\
552 > Soft Quadrupolar solid & 2.837 & 1.0   &  &  & -1&-1&-2.5 & $10^4$  & 17.6&17.6&0 \\
553        SSDQ water  & 3.051 & 0.152 &  & 2.35 & -1.35&0&-0.68 & 18.0153 & 1.77&0.6145&1.155 \\
554                \ce{Na+} & 2.579 & 0.118 & +1& & & & & 22.99 & & &\\
555                \ce{Cl-} & 4.445 & 0.1   & -1& & & & & 35.4527& & & \\ \hline
# Line 546 | Line 574 | and have been compared with the values obtaine from th
574   electrostatic energy, as well as the electrostatic contributions to
575   the force and torque on each molecule.  These quantities have been
576   computed using the SP, TSF, and GSF methods, as well as a hard cutoff,
577 < and have been compared with the values obtaine from the multipolar
578 < Ewald sum.  In Mote Carlo (MC) simulations, the energy differences
577 > and have been compared with the values obtained from the multipolar
578 > Ewald sum.  In Monte Carlo (MC) simulations, the energy differences
579   between two configurations is the primary quantity that governs how
580   the simulation proceeds. These differences are the most imporant
581   indicators of the reliability of a method even if the absolute
# Line 594 | Line 622 | To sample independent configurations of multipolar cry
622   recomputed at each time step.
623  
624   \subsection{Model systems}
625 < To sample independent configurations of multipolar crystals, a body
626 < centered cubic (bcc) crystal which is a minimum energy structure for
627 < point dipoles was generated using 3,456 molecules.  The multipoles
628 < were translationally locked in their respective crystal sites for
629 < equilibration at a relatively low temperature (50K), so that dipoles
630 < or quadrupoles could freely explore all accessible orientations.  The
631 < translational constraints were removed, and the crystals were
632 < simulated for 10 ps in the microcanonical (NVE) ensemble with an
633 < average temperature of 50 K.  Configurations were sampled at equal
634 < time intervals for the comparison of the configurational energy
635 < differences.  The crystals were not simulated close to the melting
636 < points in order to avoid translational deformation away of the ideal
637 < lattice geometry.
625 > To sample independent configurations of the multipolar crystals, body
626 > centered cubic (bcc) crystals, which exhibit the minimum energy
627 > structures for point dipoles, were generated using 3,456 molecules.
628 > The multipoles were translationally locked in their respective crystal
629 > sites for equilibration at a relatively low temperature (50K) so that
630 > dipoles or quadrupoles could freely explore all accessible
631 > orientations.  The translational constraints were then removed, the
632 > systems were re-equilibrated, and the crystals were simulated for an
633 > additional 10 ps in the microcanonical (NVE) ensemble with an average
634 > temperature of 50 K.  The balance between moments of inertia and
635 > particle mass were chosen to allow orientational sampling without
636 > significant translational motion.  Configurations were sampled at
637 > equal time intervals in order to compare configurational energy
638 > differences.  The crystals were simulated far from the melting point
639 > in order to avoid translational deformation away of the ideal lattice
640 > geometry.
641  
642 < For dipolar, quadrupolar, and mixed-multipole liquid simulations, each
643 < system was created with 2048 molecules oriented randomly.  These were
644 <
645 < system with 2,048 molecules simulated for 1ns in NVE ensemble at 300 K
646 < temperature after equilibration.  We collected 250 different
647 < configurations in equal interval of time. For the ions mixed liquid
648 < system, we converted 48 different molecules into 24 \ce{Na+} and 24
649 < \ce{Cl-} ions and equilibrated. After equilibration, the system was run
650 < at the same environment for 1ns and 250 configurations were
651 < collected. While comparing energies, forces, and torques with Ewald
652 < method, Lennard-Jones potentials were turned off and purely
653 < electrostatic interaction had been compared.
642 > For dipolar, quadrupolar, and mixed-multipole \textit{liquid}
643 > simulations, each system was created with 2,048 randomly-oriented
644 > molecules.  These were equilibrated at a temperature of 300K for 1 ns.
645 > Each system was then simulated for 1 ns in the microcanonical (NVE)
646 > ensemble.  We collected 250 different configurations at equal time
647 > intervals. For the liquid system that included ionic species, we
648 > converted 48 randomly-distributed molecules into 24 \ce{Na+} and 24
649 > \ce{Cl-} ions and re-equilibrated. After equilibration, the system was
650 > run under the same conditions for 1 ns. A total of 250 configurations
651 > were collected. In the following comparisons of energies, forces, and
652 > torques, the Lennard-Jones potentials were turned off and only the
653 > purely electrostatic quantities were compared with the same values
654 > obtained via the Ewald sum.
655  
656   \subsection{Accuracy of Energy Differences, Forces and Torques}
657   The pairwise summation techniques (outlined above) were evaluated for
# Line 633 | Line 665 | we used least square regressions analysiss for the six
665   should be identical for all methods.
666  
667   Since none of the real-space methods provide exact energy differences,
668 < we used least square regressions analysiss for the six different
668 > we used least square regressions analysis for the six different
669   molecular systems to compare $\Delta E$ from Hard, SP, GSF, and TSF
670   with the multipolar Ewald reference method.  Unitary results for both
671   the correlation (slope) and correlation coefficient for these
# Line 644 | Line 676 | also been compared by using least squares regression a
676   configurations and 250 configurations were recorded for comparison.
677   Each system provided 31,125 energy differences for a total of 186,750
678   data points.  Similarly, the magnitudes of the forces and torques have
679 < also been compared by using least squares regression analyses. In the
679 > also been compared using least squares regression analysis. In the
680   forces and torques comparison, the magnitudes of the forces acting in
681   each molecule for each configuration were evaluated. For example, our
682   dipolar liquid simulation contains 2048 molecules and there are 250
# Line 829 | Line 861 | perturbations are minimal, particularly for moderate d
861   molecules inside each other's cutoff spheres in order to correct the
862   energy conservation issues, and this perturbation is evident in the
863   statistics accumulated for the molecular forces.  The GSF
864 < perturbations are minimal, particularly for moderate damping and and
864 > perturbations are minimal, particularly for moderate damping and
865   commonly-used cutoff values ($r_c = 12$\AA).  The TSF method shows
866   reasonable agreement in the correlation coefficient but again the
867   systematic error in the forces is concerning if replication of Ewald
# Line 886 | Line 918 | directionality is shown in terms of circular variance
918   these quantities. Force and torque vectors for all six systems were
919   analyzed using Fisher statistics, and the quality of the vector
920   directionality is shown in terms of circular variance
921 < ($\mathrm{Var}(\theta$) in figure
921 > ($\mathrm{Var}(\theta)$) in figure
922   \ref{fig:slopeCorr_circularVariance}. The force and torque vectors
923   from the new real-space methods exhibit nearly-ideal Fisher probability
924   distributions (Eq.~\ref{eq:pdf}). Both the hard and SP cutoff methods
# Line 941 | Line 973 | conservation (drift less than $10^{-6}$ kcal / mol / n
973   energy over time, $\delta E_1$, and the standard deviation of energy
974   fluctuations around this drift $\delta E_0$.  Both of the
975   shifted-force methods (GSF and TSF) provide excellent energy
976 < conservation (drift less than $10^{-6}$ kcal / mol / ns / particle),
976 > conservation (drift less than $10^{-5}$ kcal / mol / ns / particle),
977   while the hard cutoff is essentially unusable for molecular dynamics.
978   SP provides some benefit over the hard cutoff because the energetic
979   jumps that happen as particles leave and enter the cutoff sphere are
# Line 956 | Line 988 | $k$-space cutoff values.
988  
989   \begin{figure}
990    \centering
991 <  \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{newDrift.pdf}
991 >  \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{newDrift_12.pdf}
992   \label{fig:energyDrift}        
993   \caption{Analysis of the energy conservation of the real-space
994    electrostatic methods. $\delta \mathrm{E}_1$ is the linear drift in
995 <  energy over time and $\delta \mathrm{E}_0$ is the standard deviation
996 <  of energy fluctuations around this drift.  All simulations were of a
997 <  2000-molecule simulation of SSDQ water with 48 ionic charges at 300
998 <  K starting from the same initial configuration. All runs utilized
999 <  the same real-space cutoff, $r_c = 12$\AA.}
995 >  energy over time (in kcal / mol / particle / ns) and $\delta
996 >  \mathrm{E}_0$ is the standard deviation of energy fluctuations
997 >  around this drift (in kcal / mol / particle).  All simulations were
998 >  of a 2000-molecule simulation of SSDQ water with 48 ionic charges at
999 >  300 K starting from the same initial configuration. All runs
1000 >  utilized the same real-space cutoff, $r_c = 12$\AA.}
1001   \end{figure}
1002  
1003  
# Line 1044 | Line 1077 | real-space cutoff boundary.
1077   handling of energies, forces, and torques as multipoles cross the
1078   real-space cutoff boundary.
1079  
1080 + \begin{acknowledgments}
1081 +  JDG acknowledges helpful discussions with Christopher
1082 +  Fennell. Support for this project was provided by the National
1083 +  Science Foundation under grant CHE-1362211. Computational time was
1084 +  provided by the Center for Research Computing (CRC) at the
1085 +  University of Notre Dame.
1086 + \end{acknowledgments}
1087 +
1088   %\bibliographystyle{aip}
1089   \newpage
1090   \bibliography{references}

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines