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

Comparing trunk/oopsePaper/EmpericalEnergy.tex (file contents):
Revision 933 by chuckv, Tue Jan 13 20:03:21 2004 UTC vs.
Revision 967 by chrisfen, Tue Jan 20 14:17:21 2004 UTC

# Line 1 | Line 1
1  
2 < \section{\label{sec:empericalEnergy}The Emperical Energy Functions}
2 > \section{\label{sec:empiricalEnergy}The Empirical Energy Functions}
3  
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
8 < representation as possible. They may represent specific atoms of an
9 < element, or be used for collections of atoms such as a methyl
10 < group. The atoms are also capable of having a directional component
11 < associated with them, often in the form of a dipole. Charges on atoms
12 < are not currently suported by {\sc oopse}.
6 > The basic unit of an {\sc oopse} simulation is the atom. The
7 > parameters describing the atom are generalized to make the atom as
8 > flexible a representation as possible. They may represent specific
9 > atoms of an element, or be used for collections of atoms such as
10 > methyl and carbonyl groups. The atoms are also capable of having
11 > directional components associated with them (\emph{e.g.}~permanent
12 > dipoles). Charges on atoms are not currently supported by {\sc oopse}.
13  
14 + \begin{lstlisting}[caption={[Specifier for molecules and atoms] An example specifying the simple Ar molecule},label=sch:AtmMole]
15 + molecule{
16 +  name = "Ar";
17 +  nAtoms = 1;
18 +  atom[0]{
19 +     type="Ar";
20 +     position( 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 );
21 +  }
22 + }
23 + \end{lstlisting}
24 +
25   The second most basic building block of a simulation is the
26   molecule. The molecule is a way for {\sc oopse} to keep track of the
27   atoms in a simulation in logical manner. This particular unit will
# Line 18 | Line 29 | As stated previously, one of the features that sets {\
29   responsible for the evaluation of its own bonded interaction
30   (i.e.~bonds, bends, and torsions).
31  
32 < As stated previously, one of the features that sets {\sc OOPSE} apart
32 > As stated previously, one of the features that sets {\sc oopse} apart
33   from most of the current molecular simulation packages is the ability
34   to handle rigid body dynamics. Rigid bodies are non-spherical
35   particles or collections of particles that have a constant internal
36   potential and move collectively.\cite{Goldstein01} They are not
37 < included in most simulation packages because of the need to
38 < consider orientational degrees of freedom and include an integrator
39 < that accurately propagates these motions in time.
37 > included in most simulation packages because of the requirement to
38 > propagate the orientational degrees of freedom. Until recently,
39 > integrators which propagate orientational motion have been lacking.
40  
41   Moving a rigid body involves determination of both the force and
42   torque applied by the surroundings, which directly affect the
43 < translation and rotation in turn. In order to accumulate the total
44 < force on a rigid body, the external forces must first be calculated
45 < for all the internal particles. The total force on the rigid body is
46 < simply the sum of these external forces.  Accumulation of the total
47 < torque on the rigid body is more complex than the force in that it is
48 < the torque applied on the center of mass that dictates rotational
49 < motion. The summation of this torque is given by
43 > translational and rotational motion in turn. In order to accumulate
44 > the total force on a rigid body, the external forces and torques must
45 > first be calculated for all the internal particles. The total force on
46 > the rigid body is simply the sum of these external forces.
47 > Accumulation of the total torque on the rigid body is more complex
48 > than the force in that it is the torque applied on the center of mass
49 > that dictates rotational motion. The torque on rigid body {\it i} is
50   \begin{equation}
51 < \mathbf{\tau}_i=
52 <        \sum_{a}(\mathbf{r}_{ia}-\mathbf{r}_i)\times \mathbf{f}_{ia},
51 > \boldsymbol{\tau}_i=
52 >        \sum_{a}(\mathbf{r}_{ia}-\mathbf{r}_i)\times \mathbf{f}_{ia}
53 >        + \boldsymbol{\tau}_{ia},
54   \label{eq:torqueAccumulate}
55   \end{equation}
56 < where $\mathbf{\tau}_i$ and $\mathbf{r}_i$ are the torque about and
57 < position of the center of mass respectively, while $\mathbf{f}_{ia}$
58 < and $\mathbf{r}_{ia}$ are the force on and position of the component
59 < particles of the rigid body.\cite{allen87:csl}
56 > where $\boldsymbol{\tau}_i$ and $\mathbf{r}_i$ are the torque on and
57 > position of the center of mass respectively, while $\mathbf{f}_{ia}$,
58 > $\mathbf{r}_{ia}$, and $\boldsymbol{\tau}_{ia}$ are the force on,
59 > position of, and torque on the component particles of the rigid body.
60  
61 < The application of the total torque is done in the body fixed axis of
61 > The summation of the total torque is done in the body fixed axis of
62   the rigid body. In order to move between the space fixed and body
63   fixed coordinate axes, parameters describing the orientation must be
64   maintained for each rigid body. At a minimum, the rotation matrix
65 < (\textbf{A}) can be described and propagated by the three Euler angles
66 < ($\phi, \theta, \text{and} \psi$), where \textbf{A} is composed of
65 > (\textbf{A}) can be described by the three Euler angles ($\phi,
66 > \theta,$ and $\psi$), where the elements of \textbf{A} are composed of
67   trigonometric operations involving $\phi, \theta,$ and
68 < $\psi$.\cite{Goldstein01} In order to avoid rotational limitations
68 > $\psi$.\cite{Goldstein01} In order to avoid numerical instabilities
69   inherent in using the Euler angles, the four parameter ``quaternion''
70 < scheme can be used instead, where \textbf{A} is composed of arithmetic
71 < operations involving the four components of a quaternion ($q_0, q_1,
72 < q_2, \text{and} q_3$).\cite{allen87:csl} Use of quaternions also leads
73 < to performance enhancements, particularly for very small
70 > scheme is often used. The elements of \textbf{A} can be expressed as
71 > arithmetic operations involving the four quaternions ($q_0, q_1, q_2,$
72 > and $q_3$).\cite{allen87:csl} Use of quaternions also leads to
73 > performance enhancements, particularly for very small
74   systems.\cite{Evans77}
75  
76 < {\sc OOPSE} utilizes a relatively new scheme that uses the entire nine
77 < parameter rotation matrix internally. Further discussion on this
78 < choice can be found in Sec.~\ref{sec:integrate}.
76 > {\sc oopse} utilizes a relatively new scheme that propagates the
77 > entire nine parameter rotation matrix internally. Further discussion
78 > on this choice can be found in Sec.~\ref{sec:integrate}.
79  
80   \subsection{\label{sec:LJPot}The Lennard Jones Potential}
81  
82 < The most basic force field implemented in OOPSE is the Lennard-Jones
82 > The most basic force field implemented in {\sc oopse} is the Lennard-Jones
83   potential. The Lennard-Jones potential. Which mimics the Van der Waals
84 < interaction at long distances, and uses an emperical repulsion at
84 > interaction at long distances, and uses an empirical repulsion at
85   short distances. The Lennard-Jones potential is given by:
86   \begin{equation}
87   V_{\text{LJ}}(r_{ij}) =
# Line 85 | Line 97 | keep the pair evaluation to a manegable number, OOPSE
97  
98   Because this potential is calculated between all pairs, the force
99   evaluation can become computationally expensive for large systems. To
100 < keep the pair evaluation to a manegable number, OOPSE employs a
100 > keep the pair evaluation to a manageable number, {\sc oopse} employs a
101   cut-off radius.\cite{allen87:csl} The cutoff radius is set to be
102   $2.5\sigma_{ii}$, where $\sigma_{ii}$ is the largest Lennard-Jones length
103   parameter in the system. Truncating the calculation at
# Line 133 | Line 145 | repaarameterization of the soft sticky dipole (SSD) mo
145   phosphatidylcholine.\cite{Cevc87} Additionally, a Lennard-Jones site
146   is located at the pseudoatom's center of mass. The model is
147   illustrated by the dark grey atom in Fig.~\ref{fig:lipidModel}. The water model we use to complement the dipoles of the lipids is out
148 < repaarameterization of the soft sticky dipole (SSD) model of Ichiye
148 > reparameterization of the soft sticky dipole (SSD) model of Ichiye
149   \emph{et al.}\cite{liu96:new_model}
150  
151   \begin{figure}
# Line 212 | Line 224 | computaional efficency, the torsion potential has been
224   \end{equation}
225   Here $\phi_{ijkl}$ is the angle defined by four bonded neighbors $i$,
226   $j$, $k$, and $l$ (again, see Fig.~\ref{fig:lipidModel}). For
227 < computaional efficency, the torsion potential has been recast after
227 > computational efficiency, the torsion potential has been recast after
228   the method of CHARMM\cite{charmm1983} whereby the angle series is
229   converted to a power series of the form:
230   \begin{equation}
# Line 267 | Line 279 | $\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i$.
279   $\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i$.
280  
281  
282 < \subsection{\label{sec:SSD}The {\sc DUFF} Water Models: SSD/E and SSD/RF}
282 > \subsection{\label{sec:SSD}The {\sc duff} Water Models: SSD/E and SSD/RF}
283  
284   In the interest of computational efficiency, the default solvent used
285 < in {\sc oopse} is the Soft Sticky Dipole (SSD) water model. SSD was
286 < developed by Ichiye \emph{et al.} as a modified form of the
287 < hard-sphere water model proposed by Bratko, Blum, and
285 > by {\sc oopse} is the extended Soft Sticky Dipole (SSD/E) water
286 > model.\cite{Gezelter04} The original SSD was developed by Ichiye
287 > \emph{et al.}\cite{liu96:new_model} as a modified form of the hard-sphere
288 > water model proposed by Bratko, Blum, and
289   Luzar.\cite{Bratko85,Bratko95} It consists of a single point dipole
290   with a Lennard-Jones core and a sticky potential that directs the
291   particles to assume the proper hydrogen bond orientation in the first
# Line 324 | Line 337 | articles.\cite{Ichiye96,Ichiye96b,Ichiye99,Ichiye03}
337   while $w^\prime$ is a purely empirical function.  A more detailed
338   description of the functional parts and variables in this potential
339   can be found in the original SSD
340 < articles.\cite{Ichiye96,Ichiye96b,Ichiye99,Ichiye03}
340 > articles.\cite{liu96:new_model,liu96:monte_carlo,chandra99:ssd_md,Ichiye03}
341  
342   Since SSD is a single-point {\it dipolar} model, the force
343   calculations are simplified significantly relative to the standard
344   {\it charged} multi-point models. In the original Monte Carlo
345   simulations using this model, Ichiye {\it et al.} reported that using
346   SSD decreased computer time by a factor of 6-7 compared to other
347 < models.\cite{Ichiye96} What is most impressive is that this savings
347 > models.\cite{liu96:new_model} What is most impressive is that these savings
348   did not come at the expense of accurate depiction of the liquid state
349   properties.  Indeed, SSD maintains reasonable agreement with the Soper
350 < data for the structural features of liquid
351 < water.\cite{Soper86,Ichiye96} Additionally, the dynamical properties
350 > diffraction data for the structural features of liquid
351 > water.\cite{Soper86,liu96:new_model} Additionally, the dynamical properties
352   exhibited by SSD agree with experiment better than those of more
353   computationally expensive models (like TIP3P and
354 < SPC/E).\cite{Ichiye99} The combination of speed and accurate depiction
354 > SPC/E).\cite{chandra99:ssd_md} The combination of speed and accurate depiction
355   of solvent properties makes SSD a very attractive model for the
356   simulation of large scale biochemical simulations.
357  
358   Recent constant pressure simulations revealed issues in the original
359   SSD model that led to lower than expected densities at all target
360   pressures.\cite{Ichiye03,Gezelter04} The default model in {\sc oopse}
361 < is SSD/E, a density corrected derivative of SSD that exhibits improved
362 < liquid structure and transport behavior. If the use of a reaction
363 < field long-range interaction correction is desired, it is recommended
364 < that the parameters be modified to those of the SSD/RF model. Solvent
365 < parameters can be easily modified in an accompanying {\sc BASS} file
366 < as illustrated in the scheme below. A table of the parameter values
367 < and the drawbacks and benefits of the different density corrected SSD
368 < models can be found in reference \ref{Gezelter04}.
361 > is therefore SSD/E, a density corrected derivative of SSD that
362 > exhibits improved liquid structure and transport behavior. If the use
363 > of a reaction field long-range interaction correction is desired, it
364 > is recommended that the parameters be modified to those of the SSD/RF
365 > model. Solvent parameters can be easily modified in an accompanying
366 > {\sc BASS} file as illustrated in the scheme below. A table of the
367 > parameter values and the drawbacks and benefits of the different
368 > density corrected SSD models can be found in reference
369 > \ref{Gezelter04}.
370  
371   !!!Place a {\sc BASS} scheme showing SSD parameters around here!!!
372  
# Line 370 | Line 384 | particularly wide adoption has been selected for inclu
384   describes the interaction of the positively charged metal core ions
385   with one another. A particular potential description called the
386   Embedded Atom Method\cite{Daw84,FBD86,johnson89,Lu97}({\sc eam}) that has
387 < particularly wide adoption has been selected for inclusion in OOPSE. A
387 > particularly wide adoption has been selected for inclusion in {\sc oopse}. A
388   good review of {\sc eam} and other metallic potential formulations was done
389   by Voter.\cite{voter}
390  
# Line 383 | Line 397 | sperically averaged atomic electron densities given by
397  
398   where $F_{i} $ is the embedding function that equates the energy required to embed a
399   positively-charged core ion $i$ into a linear superposition of
400 < sperically averaged atomic electron densities given by
400 > spherically averaged atomic electron densities given by
401   $\rho_{i}$.  $\phi_{ij}$ is a primarily repulsive pairwise interaction
402   between atoms $i$ and $j$. In the original formulation of
403   {\sc eam} cite{Daw84}, $\phi_{ij}$ was an entirely repulsive term, however
# Line 396 | Line 410 | interactions. Foiles et al. fit EAM potentials for fcc
410  
411  
412   \subsection{\label{Sec:pbc}Periodic Boundary Conditions}
413 +
414 + \newcommand{\roundme}{\operatorname{round}}
415  
416   \textit{Periodic boundary conditions} are widely used to simulate truly
417   macroscopic systems with a relatively small number of particles. The
# Line 407 | Line 423 | OOPSE. We use a matrix to describe the property of the
423   simulation box is large enough to avoid "feeling" the symmetries of
424   the periodic lattice, surface effects can be ignored. Cubic,
425   orthorhombic and parallelepiped are the available periodic cells In
426 < OOPSE. We use a matrix to describe the property of the simulation
426 > {\sc oopse}. We use a matrix to describe the property of the simulation
427   box. Therefore, both the size and shape of the simulation box can be
428   changed during the simulation. The transformation from box space
429   vector $\mathbf{s}$ to its corresponding real space vector
# Line 428 | Line 444 | s_{i}^{\prime}=s_{i}-round(s_{i})
444   \end{equation}
445   And then, each element of $\mathbf{s}$ is wrapped to lie between -0.5 to 0.5,
446   \begin{equation}
447 < s_{i}^{\prime}=s_{i}-round(s_{i})
447 > s_{i}^{\prime}=s_{i}-\roundme(s_{i})
448   \end{equation}
449   where
450  
451   %
452  
453   \begin{equation}
454 < round(x)=\left\{
455 < \begin{array}[c]{c}%
454 > \roundme(x)=\left\{
455 > \begin{array}{cc}
456   \lfloor{x+0.5}\rfloor & \text{if \ }x\geqslant0\\
457   \lceil{x-0.5}\rceil & \text{otherwise}%
458   \end{array}
459   \right.
460   \end{equation}
461 + For example, $\roundme(3.6)=4$, $\roundme(3.1)=3$, $\roundme(-3.6)=-4$,
462 + $\roundme(-3.1)=-3$.
463  
446
447 For example, $round(3.6)=4$,$round(3.1)=3$, $round(-3.6)=-4$,
448 $round(-3.1)=-3$.
449
464   Finally, we obtain the minimum image coordinates by transforming back
465   to real space,%
466  

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines