| 1 |
chrisfen |
3082 |
%\documentclass[prb,aps,twocolumn,tabularx]{revtex4} |
| 2 |
|
|
\documentclass[11pt]{article} |
| 3 |
|
|
\usepackage{tabls} |
| 4 |
|
|
%\usepackage{endfloat} |
| 5 |
|
|
\usepackage[tbtags]{amsmath} |
| 6 |
|
|
\usepackage{amsmath,bm} |
| 7 |
|
|
\usepackage{amssymb} |
| 8 |
|
|
\usepackage{mathrsfs} |
| 9 |
|
|
\usepackage{setspace} |
| 10 |
|
|
\usepackage{tabularx} |
| 11 |
|
|
\usepackage{graphicx} |
| 12 |
|
|
\usepackage{booktabs} |
| 13 |
|
|
\usepackage{colortbl} |
| 14 |
|
|
\usepackage[ref]{overcite} |
| 15 |
|
|
\pagestyle{plain} |
| 16 |
|
|
\pagenumbering{arabic} |
| 17 |
|
|
\oddsidemargin 0.0cm \evensidemargin 0.0cm |
| 18 |
|
|
\topmargin -21pt \headsep 10pt |
| 19 |
|
|
\textheight 9.0in \textwidth 6.5in |
| 20 |
|
|
\brokenpenalty=10000 |
| 21 |
|
|
\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.2} |
| 22 |
|
|
\renewcommand\citemid{\ } % no comma in optional reference note |
| 23 |
|
|
%\AtBeginDelayedFloats{\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{2}} %doublespace captions |
| 24 |
|
|
%\let\Caption\caption |
| 25 |
|
|
%\renewcommand\caption[1]{% |
| 26 |
|
|
% \Caption[#1]{}% |
| 27 |
|
|
%} |
| 28 |
|
|
%\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{1.2in} |
| 29 |
|
|
%\setlength{\belowcaptionskip}{1.2in} |
| 30 |
|
|
|
| 31 |
|
|
\begin{document} |
| 32 |
|
|
|
| 33 |
|
|
%\title{Pairwise Alternatives to the Ewald Sum: Applications |
| 34 |
|
|
%and Extension to Point Multipoles} |
| 35 |
|
|
|
| 36 |
|
|
%\author{Christopher J. Fennell and J. Daniel Gezelter\footnote{Corresponding author. \ Electronic mail: gezelter@nd.edu} \\ |
| 37 |
|
|
%Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry\\ |
| 38 |
|
|
%University of Notre Dame\\ |
| 39 |
|
|
%Notre Dame, Indiana 46556} |
| 40 |
|
|
|
| 41 |
|
|
%\date{\today} |
| 42 |
|
|
|
| 43 |
|
|
%\maketitle |
| 44 |
|
|
%\doublespacing |
| 45 |
|
|
|
| 46 |
|
|
%\begin{abstract} |
| 47 |
|
|
%\end{abstract} |
| 48 |
|
|
|
| 49 |
|
|
%\newpage |
| 50 |
|
|
|
| 51 |
|
|
%\narrowtext |
| 52 |
|
|
|
| 53 |
|
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 54 |
|
|
% BODY OF TEXT |
| 55 |
|
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 56 |
|
|
|
| 57 |
|
|
%\section{Introduction} |
| 58 |
|
|
|
| 59 |
|
|
We appreciate the critical comments presented by the reviewer; |
| 60 |
|
|
however, many of his concerns appear to by founded upon misconceptions |
| 61 |
|
|
and misunderstanding of the content of the work. Thus, we are taking |
| 62 |
|
|
this rejection as an opportunity to clarify statements within so that |
| 63 |
|
|
other readers do not draw similarly mistaken conclusions. We outline |
| 64 |
|
|
below the refinements, as well as provide responses to the points of |
| 65 |
|
|
concern made by the reviewer. Despite the overly critical stance of |
| 66 |
|
|
the reviewer, we do believe this work is of interest and utility to |
| 67 |
|
|
the audience of the Journal of Chemical Physics, and request that it |
| 68 |
|
|
be reconsidered for publication. |
| 69 |
|
|
|
| 70 |
|
|
\bigskip |
| 71 |
|
|
{\bf \Large{Manuscript Alterations and Responses}} |
| 72 |
|
|
\bigskip |
| 73 |
|
|
|
| 74 |
|
|
\begin{figure} |
| 75 |
|
|
\centering |
| 76 |
|
|
\includegraphics[width=4in]{./erfcPlot.pdf} |
| 77 |
|
|
\caption{The modulating complimentary error function used in the |
| 78 |
|
|
real-space portion of the Ewald summation.} |
| 79 |
|
|
\label{fig:erfcPlot} |
| 80 |
|
|
\end{figure} |
| 81 |
|
|
|
| 82 |
|
|
\begin{figure} |
| 83 |
|
|
\centering |
| 84 |
|
|
\includegraphics[width=4in]{./ewaldDielectric.pdf} |
| 85 |
|
|
\caption{The dielectric constant of the SPC water model using the Ewald |
| 86 |
|
|
summation as a function of ({\it left}) the Ewald coefficient |
| 87 |
|
|
($\kappa$) and ({\it right}) the $k$-Space grid detail. All |
| 88 |
|
|
calculations were performed with a 216 water molecule system using a |
| 89 |
|
|
fixed cutoff radius of 9 \AA\ at 300 K.} |
| 90 |
|
|
\label{fig:ewaldDielectric} |
| 91 |
|
|
\end{figure} |
| 92 |
|
|
|
| 93 |
|
|
We would like to close by reiterating the core point of this work as |
| 94 |
|
|
seen from high overhead. The Ewald sum is a powerful mathematical |
| 95 |
|
|
technique that allows us to treat the conditionally convergent |
| 96 |
|
|
electrostatic summation as a sum in both real- and reciprocal-space in |
| 97 |
|
|
a computationally feasible manner. This treatment is not without |
| 98 |
|
|
consequences in that its application often results on the reliance on |
| 99 |
|
|
the periodic nature of the reciprocal-space portion. The work of Wolf |
| 100 |
|
|
{\it et al.},\cite{Wolf99} as well as our previous publication and |
| 101 |
|
|
others,\cite{Zahn02,Kast03,Fennell06} outline a procedure for |
| 102 |
|
|
obtaining converged results only with the real-space portion of the |
| 103 |
|
|
sum. This recipe involves two key points: 1) neutralization of the |
| 104 |
|
|
cutoff spheres and 2) damping to accelerate convergence. The point of |
| 105 |
|
|
this manuscript is to test the abilities and limitations of this |
| 106 |
|
|
approach, as well as to provide recommended conditions and parameters. |
| 107 |
|
|
We find it unfortunate that the reviewer has chosen to assume an |
| 108 |
|
|
opinionated stance that focuses on and exaggerates the limitations of |
| 109 |
|
|
this technique. We hope that the clarifications provided both here |
| 110 |
|
|
and in the manuscript help others realize the utility of this |
| 111 |
|
|
approach. |
| 112 |
|
|
|
| 113 |
|
|
\bibliographystyle{achemso} |
| 114 |
|
|
\bibliography{response} |
| 115 |
|
|
|
| 116 |
|
|
|
| 117 |
|
|
\end{document} |
