1 |
|
|
2 |
|
\section{\label{sec:empericalEnergy}The Emperical Energy Functions} |
3 |
|
|
4 |
< |
\subsection{\label{sec:atomsMolecules}Atoms and Molecules} |
4 |
> |
\subsection{\label{sec:atomsMolecules}Atoms, Molecules and Rigid Bodies} |
5 |
|
|
6 |
|
The basic unit of an {\sc oopse} simulation is the atom. The parameters |
7 |
|
describing the atom are generalized to make the atom as flexible a |
12 |
|
are not currently suporrted by {\sc oopse}. |
13 |
|
|
14 |
|
The second most basic building block of a simulation is the |
15 |
< |
molecule. The molecule is a way for {\sc oopse} to keep track of the atoms |
16 |
< |
in a simulation in logical manner. This particular unit will store the |
17 |
< |
identities of all the atoms associated with itself and is responsible |
18 |
< |
for the evaluation of its own bonded interaction (i.e.~bonds, bends, |
19 |
< |
and torsions). |
15 |
> |
molecule. The molecule is a way for {\sc oopse} to keep track of the |
16 |
> |
atoms in a simulation in logical manner. This particular unit will |
17 |
> |
store the identities of all the atoms associated with itself and is |
18 |
> |
responsible for the evaluation of its own bonded interaction |
19 |
> |
(i.e.~bonds, bends, and torsions). |
20 |
|
|
21 |
+ |
As stated previously, one of the features that sets {\sc OOPSE} apart |
22 |
+ |
from most of the current molecular simulation packages is the ability |
23 |
+ |
to handle rigid body dynamics. Rigid bodies are non-spherical |
24 |
+ |
particles or collections of particles that have a constant internal |
25 |
+ |
potential and move collectively.\cite{Goldstein01} They are not |
26 |
+ |
included in most simulation packages because of the need to |
27 |
+ |
consider orientational degrees of freedom and include an integrator |
28 |
+ |
that accurately propagates these motions in time. |
29 |
+ |
|
30 |
+ |
Moving a rigid body involves determination of both the force and |
31 |
+ |
torque applied by the surroundings, which directly affect the |
32 |
+ |
translation and rotation in turn. In order to accumulate the total |
33 |
+ |
force on a rigid body, the external forces must first be calculated |
34 |
+ |
for all the internal particles. The total force on the rigid body is |
35 |
+ |
simply the sum of these external forces. Accumulation of the total |
36 |
+ |
torque on the rigid body is more complex than the force in that it is |
37 |
+ |
the torque applied on the center of mass that dictates rotational |
38 |
+ |
motion. The summation of this torque is given by |
39 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
40 |
+ |
\mathbf{\tau}_i= |
41 |
+ |
\sum_{a}(\mathbf{r}_{ia}-\mathbf{r}_i)\times \mathbf{f}_{ia}, |
42 |
+ |
\label{eq:torqueAccumulate} |
43 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
44 |
+ |
where $\mathbf{\tau}_i$ and $\mathbf{r}_i$ are the torque about and |
45 |
+ |
position of the center of mass respectively, while $\mathbf{f}_{ia}$ |
46 |
+ |
and $\mathbf{r}_{ia}$ are the force on and position of the component |
47 |
+ |
particles of the rigid body.\cite{allen87:csl} |
48 |
+ |
|
49 |
+ |
The application of the total torque is done in the body fixed axis of |
50 |
+ |
the rigid body. In order to move between the space fixed and body |
51 |
+ |
fixed coordinate axes, parameters describing the orientation must be |
52 |
+ |
maintained for each rigid body. At a minimum, the rotation matrix |
53 |
+ |
(\textbf{A}) can be described and propagated by the three Euler angles |
54 |
+ |
($\phi, \theta, \text{and} \psi$), where \textbf{A} is composed of |
55 |
+ |
trigonometric operations involving $\phi, \theta,$ and |
56 |
+ |
$\psi$.\cite{Goldstein01} In order to avoid rotational limitations |
57 |
+ |
inherent in using the Euler angles, the four parameter ``quaternion'' |
58 |
+ |
scheme can be used instead, where \textbf{A} is composed of arithmetic |
59 |
+ |
operations involving the four components of a quaternion ($q_0, q_1, |
60 |
+ |
q_2, \text{and} q_3$).\cite{allen87:csl} Use of quaternions also leads |
61 |
+ |
to performance enhancements, particularly for very small |
62 |
+ |
systems.\cite{Evans77} |
63 |
+ |
|
64 |
+ |
{\sc OOPSE} utilizes a relatively new scheme that uses the entire nine |
65 |
+ |
parameter rotation matrix internally. Further discussion on this |
66 |
+ |
choice can be found in Sec.~\ref{sec:integrate}. |
67 |
+ |
|
68 |
+ |
\subsection{\label{sec:LJPot}The Lennard Jones Potential} |
69 |
+ |
|
70 |
+ |
The most basic force field implemented in OOPSE is the Lennard-Jones |
71 |
+ |
potential. The Lennard-Jones potential mimics the attractive forces |
72 |
+ |
two charge neutral particles experience when spontaneous dipoles are |
73 |
+ |
induced on each other. This is the predominant intermolecular force in |
74 |
+ |
systems of such as noble gases and simple alkanes. |
75 |
+ |
|
76 |
+ |
The Lennard-Jones potential is given by: |
77 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
78 |
+ |
V_{\text{LJ}}(r_{ij}) = |
79 |
+ |
4\epsilon_{ij} \biggl[ |
80 |
+ |
\biggl(\frac{\sigma_{ij}}{r_{ij}}\biggr)^{12} |
81 |
+ |
- \biggl(\frac{\sigma_{ij}}{r_{ij}}\biggr)^{6} |
82 |
+ |
\biggr] |
83 |
+ |
\label{eq:lennardJonesPot} |
84 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
85 |
+ |
Where $r_ij$ is the distance between particle $i$ and $j$, $\sigma_{ij}$ |
86 |
+ |
scales the length of the interaction, and $\epsilon_{ij}$ scales the |
87 |
+ |
energy well depth of the potential. |
88 |
+ |
|
89 |
+ |
Because the potential is calculated between all pairs, the force |
90 |
+ |
evaluation can become computationally expensive for large systems. To |
91 |
+ |
keep the pair evaluation to a manegable number, OOPSE employs the use |
92 |
+ |
of a cut-off radius.\cite{allen87:csl} The cutoff radius is set to be |
93 |
+ |
$2.5\sigma_{ii}$, where $\sigma_{ii}$ is the largest self self length |
94 |
+ |
parameter in the system. Truncating the calculation at |
95 |
+ |
$r_{\text{cut}}$ introduces a discontinuity into the potential |
96 |
+ |
energy. To offset this discontinuity, the energy value at |
97 |
+ |
$r_{\text{cut}}$ is subtracted from the entire potential. This causes |
98 |
+ |
the equation to go to zero at the cut-off radius. |
99 |
+ |
|
100 |
+ |
Interactions between dissimilar particles requires the generation of |
101 |
+ |
cross term parameters for $\sigma$ and $\epsilon$. These are |
102 |
+ |
calculated through the Lorentz-Berthelot mixing |
103 |
+ |
rules:\cite{allen87:csl} |
104 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
105 |
+ |
\sigma_{ij} = \frac{1}{2}[\sigma_{ii} + \sigma_{jj}] |
106 |
+ |
\label{eq:sigmaMix} |
107 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
108 |
+ |
and |
109 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
110 |
+ |
\epsilon_{ij} = \sqrt{\epsilon_{ii} \epsilon_{jj}} |
111 |
+ |
\label{eq:epsilonMix} |
112 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
113 |
+ |
|
114 |
+ |
|
115 |
|
\subsection{\label{sec:DUFF}Dipolar Unified-Atom Force Field} |
116 |
|
|
117 |
|
The \underline{D}ipolar \underline{U}nified-Atom |
140 |
|
atom in Fig.~\ref{fig:lipidModel}. |
141 |
|
|
142 |
|
\begin{figure} |
143 |
< |
\epsfxsize=6in |
50 |
< |
\epsfbox{lipidModel.epsi} |
143 |
> |
\epsfbox{lipidModel.eps} |
144 |
|
\caption{A representation of the lipid model. $\phi$ is the torsion angle, $\theta$ % |
145 |
|
is the bend angle, $\mu$ is the dipole moment of the head group, and n is the chain length.} |
146 |
|
\label{fig:lipidModel} |
258 |
|
By recasting the equation to a power series, repeated trigonometric |
259 |
|
evaluations are avoided during the calculation of the potential. |
260 |
|
|
168 |
– |
The Lennard-Jones potential is given by: |
169 |
– |
\begin{equation} |
170 |
– |
V_{\text{LJ}}(r_{ij}) = |
171 |
– |
4\epsilon_{ij} \biggl[ |
172 |
– |
\biggl(\frac{\sigma_{ij}}{r_{ij}}\biggr)^{12} |
173 |
– |
- \biggl(\frac{\sigma_{ij}}{r_{ij}}\biggr)^{6} |
174 |
– |
\biggr] |
175 |
– |
\label{eq:lennardJonesPot} |
176 |
– |
\end{equation} |
177 |
– |
Where $r_ij$ is the distance between atoms $i$ and $j$, $\sigma_{ij}$ |
178 |
– |
scales the length of the interaction, and $\epsilon_{ij}$ scales the |
179 |
– |
energy of the potential. |
261 |
|
|
262 |
+ |
|
263 |
|
The dipole-dipole potential has the following form: |
264 |
|
\begin{equation} |
265 |
|
V_{\text{dipole}}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i}, |
278 |
|
$i$ it takes its orientation from $\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i$. |
279 |
|
|
280 |
|
|
281 |
< |
\subsection{\label{sec:SSD}Water Model: SSD and Derivatives} |
281 |
> |
\subsection{\label{sec:SSD}The {\sc DUFF} Water Models: SSD/E and SSD/RF} |
282 |
|
|
283 |
< |
In the interest of computational efficiency, the native solvent used |
283 |
> |
In the interest of computational efficiency, the default solvent used |
284 |
|
in {\sc oopse} is the Soft Sticky Dipole (SSD) water model. SSD was |
285 |
|
developed by Ichiye \emph{et al.} as a modified form of the |
286 |
|
hard-sphere water model proposed by Bratko, Blum, and |
290 |
|
solvation shell. Thus, the interaction between two SSD water molecules |
291 |
|
\emph{i} and \emph{j} is given by the potential |
292 |
|
\begin{equation} |
293 |
< |
u_{ij} = u_{ij}^{LJ} (r_{ij})\ + u_{ij}^{dp} |
294 |
< |
(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)\ + |
295 |
< |
u_{ij}^{sp} |
296 |
< |
(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j), |
293 |
> |
V_{ij} = |
294 |
> |
V_{ij}^{LJ} (r_{ij})\ + V_{ij}^{dp} |
295 |
> |
(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)\ + |
296 |
> |
V_{ij}^{sp} |
297 |
> |
(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j), |
298 |
> |
\label{eq:ssdPot} |
299 |
|
\end{equation} |
300 |
|
where the $\mathbf{r}_{ij}$ is the position vector between molecules |
301 |
< |
\emph{i} and \emph{j} with magnitude equal to the distance $r_ij$, and |
301 |
> |
\emph{i} and \emph{j} with magnitude equal to the distance $r_{ij}$, and |
302 |
|
$\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i$ and $\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j$ represent the |
303 |
< |
orientations of the respective molecules. The Lennard-Jones, dipole, |
304 |
< |
and sticky parts of the potential are giving by the following |
305 |
< |
equations, |
303 |
> |
orientations of the respective molecules. The Lennard-Jones and dipole |
304 |
> |
parts of the potential are given by equations \ref{eq:lennardJonesPot} |
305 |
> |
and \ref{eq:dipolePot} respectively. The sticky part is described by |
306 |
> |
the following, |
307 |
|
\begin{equation} |
308 |
< |
u_{ij}^{LJ}(r_{ij}) = 4\epsilon \left[\left(\frac{\sigma}{r_{ij}}\right)^{12}-\left(\frac{\sigma}{r_{ij}}\right)^{6}\right], |
308 |
> |
u_{ij}^{sp}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)= |
309 |
> |
\frac{\nu_0}{2}[s(r_{ij})w(\mathbf{r}_{ij}, |
310 |
> |
\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j) + |
311 |
> |
s^\prime(r_{ij})w^\prime(\mathbf{r}_{ij}, |
312 |
> |
\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)]\ , |
313 |
> |
\label{eq:stickyPot} |
314 |
|
\end{equation} |
315 |
+ |
where $\nu_0$ is a strength parameter for the sticky potential, and |
316 |
+ |
$s$ and $s^\prime$ are cubic switching functions which turn off the |
317 |
+ |
sticky interaction beyond the first solvation shell. The $w$ function |
318 |
+ |
can be thought of as an attractive potential with tetrahedral |
319 |
+ |
geometry: |
320 |
|
\begin{equation} |
321 |
< |
u_{ij}^{dp} = \frac{\boldsymbol{\mu}_i\cdot\boldsymbol{\mu}_j}{r_{ij}^3}-\frac{3(\boldsymbol{\mu}_i\cdot\mathbf{r}_{ij})(\boldsymbol{\mu}_j\cdot\mathbf{r}_{ij})}{r_{ij}^5}\ , |
321 |
> |
w({\bf r}_{ij},{\bf \Omega}_i,{\bf \Omega}_j)= |
322 |
> |
\sin\theta_{ij}\sin2\theta_{ij}\cos2\phi_{ij}, |
323 |
> |
\label{eq:stickyW} |
324 |
|
\end{equation} |
325 |
+ |
while the $w^\prime$ function counters the normal aligned and |
326 |
+ |
anti-aligned structures favored by point dipoles: |
327 |
|
\begin{equation} |
328 |
< |
\begin{split} |
329 |
< |
u_{ij}^{sp} |
330 |
< |
(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j) |
232 |
< |
&= |
233 |
< |
\frac{\nu_0}{2}[s(r_{ij})w(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)\\ |
234 |
< |
& \quad \ + |
235 |
< |
s^\prime(r_{ij})w^\prime(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)]\ , |
236 |
< |
\end{split} |
328 |
> |
w^\prime({\bf r}_{ij},{\bf \Omega}_i,{\bf \Omega}_j)= |
329 |
> |
(\cos\theta_{ij}-0.6)^2(\cos\theta_{ij}+0.8)^2-w^0, |
330 |
> |
\label{eq:stickyWprime} |
331 |
|
\end{equation} |
332 |
< |
where $\boldsymbol{\mu}_i$ and $\boldsymbol{\mu}_j$ are the dipole |
333 |
< |
unit vectors of particles \emph{i} and \emph{j} with magnitude 2.35 D, |
334 |
< |
$\nu_0$ scales the strength of the overall sticky potential, $s$ and |
335 |
< |
$s^\prime$ are cubic switching functions. The $w$ and $w^\prime$ |
336 |
< |
functions take the following forms, |
337 |
< |
\begin{equation} |
338 |
< |
w(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)=\sin\theta_{ij}\sin2\theta_{ij}\cos2\phi_{ij}, |
245 |
< |
\end{equation} |
246 |
< |
\begin{equation} |
247 |
< |
w^\prime(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j) = (\cos\theta_{ij}-0.6)^2(\cos\theta_{ij}+0.8)^2-w^0, |
248 |
< |
\end{equation} |
249 |
< |
where $w^0 = 0.07715$. The $w$ function is the tetrahedral attractive |
250 |
< |
term that promotes hydrogen bonding orientations within the first |
251 |
< |
solvation shell, and $w^\prime$ is a dipolar repulsion term that |
252 |
< |
repels unrealistic dipolar arrangements within the first solvation |
253 |
< |
shell. A more detailed description of the functional parts and |
254 |
< |
variables in this potential can be found in other |
255 |
< |
articles.\cite{liu96:new_model,chandra99:ssd_md} |
332 |
> |
It should be noted that $w$ is proportional to the sum of the $Y_3^2$ |
333 |
> |
and $Y_3^{-2}$ spherical harmonics (a linear combination which |
334 |
> |
enhances the tetrahedral geometry for hydrogen bonded structures), |
335 |
> |
while $w^\prime$ is a purely empirical function. A more detailed |
336 |
> |
description of the functional parts and variables in this potential |
337 |
> |
can be found in the original SSD |
338 |
> |
articles.\cite{Ichiye96,Ichiye96b,Ichiye99,Ichiye03} |
339 |
|
|
340 |
< |
Since SSD is a one-site point dipole model, the force calculations are |
341 |
< |
simplified significantly from a computational standpoint, in that the |
342 |
< |
number of long-range interactions is dramatically reduced. In the |
343 |
< |
original Monte Carlo simulations using this model, Ichiye \emph{et |
344 |
< |
al.} reported a calculation speed up of up to an order of magnitude |
345 |
< |
over other comparable models while maintaining the structural behavior |
346 |
< |
of water.\cite{liu96:new_model} In the original molecular dynamics studies of |
347 |
< |
SSD, it was shown that it actually improves upon the prediction of |
348 |
< |
water's dynamical properties over TIP3P and SPC/E.\cite{chandra99:ssd_md} |
340 |
> |
Since SSD is a single-point {\it dipolar} model, the force |
341 |
> |
calculations are simplified significantly relative to the standard |
342 |
> |
{\it charged} multi-point models. In the original Monte Carlo |
343 |
> |
simulations using this model, Ichiye {\it et al.} reported that using |
344 |
> |
SSD decreased computer time by a factor of 6-7 compared to other |
345 |
> |
models.\cite{Ichiye96} What is most impressive is that this savings |
346 |
> |
did not come at the expense of accurate depiction of the liquid state |
347 |
> |
properties. Indeed, SSD maintains reasonable agreement with the Soper |
348 |
> |
data for the structural features of liquid |
349 |
> |
water.\cite{Soper86,Ichiye96} Additionally, the dynamical properties |
350 |
> |
exhibited by SSD agree with experiment better than those of more |
351 |
> |
computationally expensive models (like TIP3P and |
352 |
> |
SPC/E).\cite{Ichiye99} The combination of speed and accurate depiction |
353 |
> |
of solvent properties makes SSD a very attractive model for the |
354 |
> |
simulation of large scale biochemical simulations. |
355 |
|
|
356 |
|
Recent constant pressure simulations revealed issues in the original |
357 |
|
SSD model that led to lower than expected densities at all target |
358 |
< |
pressures.\cite{Ichiye03,Gezelter04} Reparameterizations of the |
359 |
< |
original SSD have resulted in improved density behavior, as well as |
360 |
< |
alterations in the water structure and transport behavior. {\sc oopse} is |
361 |
< |
easily modified to impliment these new potential parameter sets for |
362 |
< |
the derivative water models: SSD1, SSD/E, and SSD/RF. All of the |
363 |
< |
variable parameters are listed in the accompanying BASS file, and |
364 |
< |
these parameters simply need to be changed to the updated values. |
358 |
> |
pressures.\cite{Ichiye03,Gezelter04} The default model in {\sc oopse} |
359 |
> |
is SSD/E, a density corrected derivative of SSD that exhibits improved |
360 |
> |
liquid structure and transport behavior. If the use of a reaction |
361 |
> |
field long-range interaction correction is desired, it is recommended |
362 |
> |
that the parameters be modified to those of the SSD/RF model. Solvent |
363 |
> |
parameters can be easily modified in an accompanying {\sc BASS} file |
364 |
> |
as illustrated in the scheme below. A table of the parameter values |
365 |
> |
and the drawbacks and benefits of the different density corrected SSD |
366 |
> |
models can be found in reference \ref{Gezelter04}. |
367 |
|
|
368 |
+ |
!!!Place a {\sc BASS} scheme showing SSD parameters around here!!! |
369 |
|
|
370 |
|
\subsection{\label{sec:eam}Embedded Atom Model} |
371 |
|
|
372 |
< |
here there be Monsters |
372 |
> |
Several molecular dynamics codes\cite{dynamo86} exist which have the |
373 |
> |
capacity to simulate metallic systems, including some that have |
374 |
> |
parallel computational abilities\cite{plimpton93}. Potentials that |
375 |
> |
describe bonding transition metal |
376 |
> |
systems\cite{Finnis84,Ercolessi88,Chen90,Qi99,Ercolessi02} have a |
377 |
> |
attractive interaction which models the stabilization of ``Embedding'' |
378 |
> |
a positively charged metal ion in an electron density created by the |
379 |
> |
free valance ``sea'' of electrons created by the surrounding atoms in |
380 |
> |
the system. A mostly repulsive pairwise part of the potential |
381 |
> |
describes the interaction of the positively charged metal core ions |
382 |
> |
with one another. A particular potential description called the |
383 |
> |
Embedded Atom Method\cite{Daw84,FBD86,johnson89,Lu97}(EAM) that has |
384 |
> |
particularly wide adoption has been selected for inclusion in OOPSE. A |
385 |
> |
good review of EAM and other metallic potential formulations was done |
386 |
> |
by Voter.\cite{voter} |
387 |
> |
|
388 |
> |
The {\sc eam} potential has the form: |
389 |
> |
\begin{eqnarray} |
390 |
> |
V & = & \sum_{i} F_{i}\left[\rho_{i}\right] + \sum_{i} \sum_{j \neq i} |
391 |
> |
\phi_{ij}({\bf r}_{ij}) \\ |
392 |
> |
\rho_{i} & = & \sum_{j \neq i} f_{j}({\bf r}_{ij}) |
393 |
> |
\end{eqnarray} |
394 |
> |
|
395 |
> |
where $\phi_{ij}$ is a primarily repulsive pairwise interaction |
396 |
> |
between atoms $i$ and $j$.In the origional formulation of |
397 |
> |
EAM\cite{Daw84}, $\phi_{ij}$ was an entirely repulsive term, however |
398 |
> |
in later refinements to EAM have shown that nonuniqueness between $F$ |
399 |
> |
and $\phi$ allow for more general forms for $\phi$.\cite{Daw89} The |
400 |
> |
embedding function $F_{i}$ is the energy required to embedded an |
401 |
> |
positively-charged core ion $i$ into a linear supeposition of |
402 |
> |
sperically averaged atomic electron densities given by |
403 |
> |
$\rho_{i}$. There is a cutoff distance, $r_{cut}$, which limits the |
404 |
> |
summations in the {\sc eam} equation to the few dozen atoms |
405 |
> |
surrounding atom $i$ for both the density $\rho$ and pairwise $\phi$ |
406 |
> |
interactions. |
407 |
> |
|
408 |
> |
\subsection{\label{Sec:pbc}Periodic Boundary Conditions} |
409 |
> |
|
410 |
> |
\textit{Periodic boundary conditions} are widely used to simulate truly |
411 |
> |
macroscopic systems with a relatively small number of particles. Simulation |
412 |
> |
box is replicated throughout space to form an infinite lattice. During the |
413 |
> |
simulation, when a particle moves in the primary cell, its periodic image |
414 |
> |
particles in other boxes move in exactly the same direction with exactly the |
415 |
> |
same orientation.Thus, as a particle leaves the primary cell, one of its |
416 |
> |
images will enter through the opposite face.If the simulation box is large |
417 |
> |
enough to avoid "feeling" the symmetric of the periodic lattice,the surface |
418 |
> |
effect could be ignored. Cubic and parallelepiped are the available periodic |
419 |
> |
cells. \bigskip In OOPSE, we use the matrix instead of the vector to describe |
420 |
> |
the property of the simulation box. Therefore, not only the size of the |
421 |
> |
simulation box could be changed during the simulation, but also the shape of |
422 |
> |
it. The transformation from box space vector $\overrightarrow{s}$ to its |
423 |
> |
corresponding real space vector $\overrightarrow{r}$ is defined by |
424 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
425 |
> |
\overrightarrow{r}=H\overrightarrow{s}% |
426 |
> |
\end{equation} |
427 |
> |
|
428 |
> |
|
429 |
> |
where $H=(h_{x},h_{y},h_{z})$ is a transformation matrix made up of the three |
430 |
> |
box axis vectors. $h_{x},h_{y}$ and $h_{z}$ represent the sides of the |
431 |
> |
simulation box respectively. |
432 |
> |
|
433 |
> |
To find the minimum image, we need to convert the real vector to its |
434 |
> |
corresponding vector in box space first, \bigskip% |
435 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
436 |
> |
\overrightarrow{s}=H^{-1}\overrightarrow{r}% |
437 |
> |
\end{equation} |
438 |
> |
And then, each element of $\overrightarrow{s}$ is casted to lie between -0.5 |
439 |
> |
to 0.5, |
440 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
441 |
> |
s_{i}^{\prime}=s_{i}-round(s_{i}) |
442 |
> |
\end{equation} |
443 |
> |
where% |
444 |
> |
|
445 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
446 |
> |
round(x)=\lfloor{x+0.5}\rfloor\text{ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ }if\text{ |
447 |
> |
}x\geqslant0 |
448 |
> |
\end{equation} |
449 |
> |
% |
450 |
> |
|
451 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
452 |
> |
round(x)=\lceil{x-0.5}\rceil\text{ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ }if\text{ }x<0 |
453 |
> |
\end{equation} |
454 |
> |
|
455 |
> |
|
456 |
> |
For example, $round(3.6)=4$,$round(3.1)=3$, $round(-3.6)=-4$, $round(-3.1)=-3$. |
457 |
> |
|
458 |
> |
Finally, we could get the minimum image by transforming back to real space,% |
459 |
> |
|
460 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
461 |
> |
\overrightarrow{r^{\prime}}=H^{-1}\overrightarrow{s^{\prime}}% |
462 |
> |
\end{equation} |