ViewVC Help
View File | Revision Log | Show Annotations | View Changeset | Root Listing
root/group/trunk/oopsePaper/EmpericalEnergy.tex
Revision: 930
Committed: Tue Jan 13 19:24:07 2004 UTC (20 years, 5 months ago) by mmeineke
Content type: application/x-tex
File size: 20613 byte(s)
Log Message:
added new revisions

File Contents

# Content
1
2 \section{\label{sec:empericalEnergy}The Emperical 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}.
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
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. Which mimics the Van der Waals
72 interaction at long distances, and uses an emperical repulsion at
73 short distances. The Lennard-Jones potential is given by:
74 \begin{equation}
75 V_{\text{LJ}}(r_{ij}) =
76 4\epsilon_{ij} \biggl[
77 \biggl(\frac{\sigma_{ij}}{r_{ij}}\biggr)^{12}
78 - \biggl(\frac{\sigma_{ij}}{r_{ij}}\biggr)^{6}
79 \biggr]
80 \label{eq:lennardJonesPot}
81 \end{equation}
82 Where $r_{ij}$ is the distance between particle $i$ and $j$,
83 $\sigma_{ij}$ scales the length of the interaction, and
84 $\epsilon_{ij}$ scales the well depth of the potential.
85
86 Because this potential is calculated between all pairs, the force
87 evaluation can become computationally expensive for large systems. To
88 keep the pair evaluation to a manegable number, OOPSE employs a
89 cut-off radius.\cite{allen87:csl} The cutoff radius is set to be
90 $2.5\sigma_{ii}$, where $\sigma_{ii}$ is the largest Lennard-Jones length
91 parameter in the system. Truncating the calculation at
92 $r_{\text{cut}}$ introduces a discontinuity into the potential
93 energy. To offset this discontinuity, the energy value at
94 $r_{\text{cut}}$ is subtracted from the entire potential. This causes
95 the potential to go to zero at the cut-off radius.
96
97 Interactions between dissimilar particles requires the generation of
98 cross term parameters for $\sigma$ and $\epsilon$. These are
99 calculated through the Lorentz-Berthelot mixing
100 rules:\cite{allen87:csl}
101 \begin{equation}
102 \sigma_{ij} = \frac{1}{2}[\sigma_{ii} + \sigma_{jj}]
103 \label{eq:sigmaMix}
104 \end{equation}
105 and
106 \begin{equation}
107 \epsilon_{ij} = \sqrt{\epsilon_{ii} \epsilon_{jj}}
108 \label{eq:epsilonMix}
109 \end{equation}
110
111
112 \subsection{\label{sec:DUFF}Dipolar Unified-Atom Force Field}
113
114 The Dipolar Unified-atom Force Field ({\sc duff}) was developed to
115 simulate lipid bilayers. The systems require a model capable of forming
116 bilayers, while still being sufficiently computationally efficient to
117 allow simulations of large systems ($\approx$100's of phospholipids,
118 $\approx$1000's of waters) for long times ($\approx$10's of
119 nanoseconds).
120
121 With this goal in mind, {\sc duff} has no point charges. Charge
122 neutral distributions were replaced with dipoles, while most atoms and
123 groups of atoms were reduced to Lennard-Jones interaction sites. This
124 simplification cuts the length scale of long range interactions from
125 $\frac{1}{r}$ to $\frac{1}{r^3}$, allowing us to avoid the
126 computationally expensive Ewald sum. Instead, we can use
127 neighbor-lists, reaction field, and cutoff radii for the dipolar
128 interactions.
129
130 As an example, lipid head-groups in {\sc duff} are represented as
131 point dipole interaction sites. By placing a dipole of 20.6~Debye at
132 the head group center of mass, our model mimics the head group of
133 phosphatidylcholine.\cite{Cevc87} Additionally, a Lennard-Jones site
134 is located at the pseudoatom's center of mass. The model is
135 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
136 repaarameterization of the soft sticky dipole (SSD) model of Ichiye
137 \emph{et al.}\cite{liu96:new_model}
138
139 \begin{figure}
140 \epsfxsize=\linewidth
141 \epsfbox{lipidModel.eps}
142 \caption{A representation of the lipid model. $\phi$ is the torsion angle, $\theta$ %
143 is the bend angle, $\mu$ is the dipole moment of the head group, and n
144 is the chain length.}
145 \label{fig:lipidModel}
146 \end{figure}
147
148 Turning to the tails of the phospholipids, we have used a set of
149 scalable parameters to model the alkyl groups with Lennard-Jones
150 sites. For this, we have used the TraPPE force field of Siepmann
151 \emph{et al}.\cite{Siepmann1998} TraPPE is a unified-atom
152 representation of n-alkanes, which is parametrized against phase
153 equilibria using Gibbs Monte Carlo simulation
154 techniques.\cite{Siepmann1998} One of the advantages of TraPPE is that
155 it generalizes the types of atoms in an alkyl chain to keep the number
156 of pseudoatoms to a minimum; the parameters for an atom such as
157 $\text{CH}_2$ do not change depending on what species are bonded to
158 it.
159
160 TraPPE also constrains of all bonds to be of fixed length. Typically,
161 bond vibrations are the fastest motions in a molecular dynamic
162 simulation. Small time steps between force evaluations must be used to
163 ensure adequate sampling of the bond potential conservation of
164 energy. By constraining the bond lengths, larger time steps may be
165 used when integrating the equations of motion.
166
167
168 \subsubsection{\label{subSec:energyFunctions}{\sc duff} Energy Functions}
169
170 The total energy of function in {\sc duff} is given by the following:
171 \begin{equation}
172 V_{\text{Total}} = \sum^{N}_{I=1} V^{I}_{\text{Internal}}
173 + \sum^{N}_{I=1} \sum_{J>I} V^{IJ}_{\text{Cross}}
174 \label{eq:totalPotential}
175 \end{equation}
176 Where $V^{I}_{\text{Internal}}$ is the internal potential of a molecule:
177 \begin{equation}
178 V^{I}_{\text{Internal}} =
179 \sum_{\theta_{ijk} \in I} V_{\text{bend}}(\theta_{ijk})
180 + \sum_{\phi_{ijkl} \in I} V_{\text{torsion}}(\phi_{ijkl})
181 + \sum_{i \in I} \sum_{(j>i+4) \in I}
182 \biggl[ V_{\text{LJ}}(r_{ij}) + V_{\text{dipole}}
183 (\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})
184 \biggr]
185 \label{eq:internalPotential}
186 \end{equation}
187 Here $V_{\text{bend}}$ is the bend potential for all 1, 3 bonded pairs
188 within the molecule, and $V_{\text{torsion}}$ is the torsion potential
189 for all 1, 4 bonded pairs. The pairwise portions of the internal
190 potential are excluded for pairs that are closer than three bonds,
191 i.e.~atom pairs farther away than a torsion are included in the
192 pair-wise loop.
193
194
195 The bend potential of a molecule is represented by the following function:
196 \begin{equation}
197 V_{\theta_{ijk}} = k_{\theta}( \theta_{ijk} - \theta_0 )^2 \label{eq:bendPot}
198 \end{equation}
199 Where $\theta_{ijk}$ is the angle defined by atoms $i$, $j$, and $k$
200 (see Fig.~\ref{fig:lipidModel}), and $\theta_0$ is the equilibrium
201 bond angle. $k_{\theta}$ is the force constant which determines the
202 strength of the harmonic bend. The parameters for $k_{\theta}$ and
203 $\theta_0$ are based off of those in TraPPE.\cite{Siepmann1998}
204
205 The torsion potential and parameters are also taken from TraPPE. It is
206 of the form:
207 \begin{equation}
208 V_{\text{torsion}}(\phi) = c_1[1 + \cos \phi]
209 + c_2[1 + \cos(2\phi)]
210 + c_3[1 + \cos(3\phi)]
211 \label{eq:origTorsionPot}
212 \end{equation}
213 Here $\phi_{ijkl}$ is the angle defined by four bonded neighbors $i$,
214 $j$, $k$, and $l$ (again, see Fig.~\ref{fig:lipidModel}). For
215 computaional efficency, the torsion potential has been recast after
216 the method of CHARMM\cite{charmm1983} whereby the angle series is
217 converted to a power series of the form:
218 \begin{equation}
219 V_{\text{torsion}}(\phi_{ijkl}) =
220 k_3 \cos^3 \phi + k_2 \cos^2 \phi + k_1 \cos \phi + k_0
221 \label{eq:torsionPot}
222 \end{equation}
223 Where:
224 \begin{align*}
225 k_0 &= c_1 + c_3 \\
226 k_1 &= c_1 - 3c_3 \\
227 k_2 &= 2 c_2 \\
228 k_3 &= 4c_3
229 \end{align*}
230 By recasting the equation to a power series, repeated trigonometric
231 evaluations are avoided during the calculation of the potential.
232
233
234 The cross portion of the total potential, $V^{IJ}_{\text{Cross}}$, is
235 as follows:
236 \begin{equation}
237 V^{IJ}_{\text{Cross}} =
238 \sum_{i \in I} \sum_{j \in J}
239 \biggl[ V_{\text{LJ}}(r_{ij}) + V_{\text{dipole}}
240 (\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})
241 + V_{\text{sticky}}
242 (\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})
243 \biggr]
244 \label{eq:crossPotentail}
245 \end{equation}
246 Where $V_{\text{LJ}}$ is the Lennard Jones potential,
247 $V_{\text{dipole}}$ is the dipole dipole potential, and
248 $V_{\text{sticky}}$ is the sticky potential defined by the SSD
249 model. Note that not all atom types include all interactions.
250
251 The dipole-dipole potential has the following form:
252 \begin{equation}
253 V_{\text{dipole}}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},
254 \boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j}) = \frac{|\mu_i||\mu_j|}{4\pi\epsilon_{0}r_{ij}^{3}} \biggl[
255 \boldsymbol{\hat{u}}_{i} \cdot \boldsymbol{\hat{u}}_{j}
256 -
257 \frac{3(\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}_i \cdot \mathbf{r}_{ij}) %
258 (\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}_j \cdot \mathbf{r}_{ij}) }
259 {r^{2}_{ij}} \biggr]
260 \label{eq:dipolePot}
261 \end{equation}
262 Here $\mathbf{r}_{ij}$ is the vector starting at atom $i$ pointing
263 towards $j$, and $\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i$ and $\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j$
264 are the Euler angles of atom $i$ and $j$ respectively. $|\mu_i|$ is
265 the magnitude of the dipole moment of atom $i$ and
266 $\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}_i$ is the standard unit orientation vector of
267 $\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i$.
268
269
270 \subsection{\label{sec:SSD}The {\sc DUFF} Water Models: SSD/E and SSD/RF}
271
272 In the interest of computational efficiency, the default solvent used
273 in {\sc oopse} is the Soft Sticky Dipole (SSD) water model. SSD was
274 developed by Ichiye \emph{et al.} as a modified form of the
275 hard-sphere water model proposed by Bratko, Blum, and
276 Luzar.\cite{Bratko85,Bratko95} It consists of a single point dipole
277 with a Lennard-Jones core and a sticky potential that directs the
278 particles to assume the proper hydrogen bond orientation in the first
279 solvation shell. Thus, the interaction between two SSD water molecules
280 \emph{i} and \emph{j} is given by the potential
281 \begin{equation}
282 V_{ij} =
283 V_{ij}^{LJ} (r_{ij})\ + V_{ij}^{dp}
284 (\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)\ +
285 V_{ij}^{sp}
286 (\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j),
287 \label{eq:ssdPot}
288 \end{equation}
289 where the $\mathbf{r}_{ij}$ is the position vector between molecules
290 \emph{i} and \emph{j} with magnitude equal to the distance $r_{ij}$, and
291 $\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i$ and $\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j$ represent the
292 orientations of the respective molecules. The Lennard-Jones and dipole
293 parts of the potential are given by equations \ref{eq:lennardJonesPot}
294 and \ref{eq:dipolePot} respectively. The sticky part is described by
295 the following,
296 \begin{equation}
297 u_{ij}^{sp}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)=
298 \frac{\nu_0}{2}[s(r_{ij})w(\mathbf{r}_{ij},
299 \boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j) +
300 s^\prime(r_{ij})w^\prime(\mathbf{r}_{ij},
301 \boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)]\ ,
302 \label{eq:stickyPot}
303 \end{equation}
304 where $\nu_0$ is a strength parameter for the sticky potential, and
305 $s$ and $s^\prime$ are cubic switching functions which turn off the
306 sticky interaction beyond the first solvation shell. The $w$ function
307 can be thought of as an attractive potential with tetrahedral
308 geometry:
309 \begin{equation}
310 w({\bf r}_{ij},{\bf \Omega}_i,{\bf \Omega}_j)=
311 \sin\theta_{ij}\sin2\theta_{ij}\cos2\phi_{ij},
312 \label{eq:stickyW}
313 \end{equation}
314 while the $w^\prime$ function counters the normal aligned and
315 anti-aligned structures favored by point dipoles:
316 \begin{equation}
317 w^\prime({\bf r}_{ij},{\bf \Omega}_i,{\bf \Omega}_j)=
318 (\cos\theta_{ij}-0.6)^2(\cos\theta_{ij}+0.8)^2-w^0,
319 \label{eq:stickyWprime}
320 \end{equation}
321 It should be noted that $w$ is proportional to the sum of the $Y_3^2$
322 and $Y_3^{-2}$ spherical harmonics (a linear combination which
323 enhances the tetrahedral geometry for hydrogen bonded structures),
324 while $w^\prime$ is a purely empirical function. A more detailed
325 description of the functional parts and variables in this potential
326 can be found in the original SSD
327 articles.\cite{Ichiye96,Ichiye96b,Ichiye99,Ichiye03}
328
329 Since SSD is a single-point {\it dipolar} model, the force
330 calculations are simplified significantly relative to the standard
331 {\it charged} multi-point models. In the original Monte Carlo
332 simulations using this model, Ichiye {\it et al.} reported that using
333 SSD decreased computer time by a factor of 6-7 compared to other
334 models.\cite{Ichiye96} What is most impressive is that this savings
335 did not come at the expense of accurate depiction of the liquid state
336 properties. Indeed, SSD maintains reasonable agreement with the Soper
337 data for the structural features of liquid
338 water.\cite{Soper86,Ichiye96} Additionally, the dynamical properties
339 exhibited by SSD agree with experiment better than those of more
340 computationally expensive models (like TIP3P and
341 SPC/E).\cite{Ichiye99} The combination of speed and accurate depiction
342 of solvent properties makes SSD a very attractive model for the
343 simulation of large scale biochemical simulations.
344
345 Recent constant pressure simulations revealed issues in the original
346 SSD model that led to lower than expected densities at all target
347 pressures.\cite{Ichiye03,Gezelter04} The default model in {\sc oopse}
348 is SSD/E, a density corrected derivative of SSD that exhibits improved
349 liquid structure and transport behavior. If the use of a reaction
350 field long-range interaction correction is desired, it is recommended
351 that the parameters be modified to those of the SSD/RF model. Solvent
352 parameters can be easily modified in an accompanying {\sc BASS} file
353 as illustrated in the scheme below. A table of the parameter values
354 and the drawbacks and benefits of the different density corrected SSD
355 models can be found in reference \ref{Gezelter04}.
356
357 !!!Place a {\sc BASS} scheme showing SSD parameters around here!!!
358
359 \subsection{\label{sec:eam}Embedded Atom Method}
360
361 Several molecular dynamics codes\cite{dynamo86} exist which have the
362 capacity to simulate metallic systems, including some that have
363 parallel computational abilities\cite{plimpton93}. Potentials that
364 describe bonding transition metal
365 systems\cite{Finnis84,Ercolessi88,Chen90,Qi99,Ercolessi02} have a
366 attractive interaction which models the stabilization of ``Embedding''
367 a positively charged metal ion in an electron density created by the
368 free valance ``sea'' of electrons created by the surrounding atoms in
369 the system. A mostly repulsive pairwise part of the potential
370 describes the interaction of the positively charged metal core ions
371 with one another. A particular potential description called the
372 Embedded Atom Method\cite{Daw84,FBD86,johnson89,Lu97}(EAM) that has
373 particularly wide adoption has been selected for inclusion in OOPSE. A
374 good review of EAM and other metallic potential formulations was done
375 by Voter.\cite{voter}
376
377 The {\sc eam} potential has the form:
378 \begin{eqnarray}
379 V & = & \sum_{i} F_{i}\left[\rho_{i}\right] + \sum_{i} \sum_{j \neq i}
380 \phi_{ij}({\bf r}_{ij}) \\
381 \rho_{i} & = & \sum_{j \neq i} f_{j}({\bf r}_{ij})
382 \end{eqnarray}
383
384 where $\phi_{ij}$ is a primarily repulsive pairwise interaction
385 between atoms $i$ and $j$.In the origional formulation of
386 EAM\cite{Daw84}, $\phi_{ij}$ was an entirely repulsive term, however
387 in later refinements to EAM have shown that nonuniqueness between $F$
388 and $\phi$ allow for more general forms for $\phi$.\cite{Daw89} The
389 embedding function $F_{i}$ is the energy required to embedded an
390 positively-charged core ion $i$ into a linear supeposition of
391 sperically averaged atomic electron densities given by
392 $\rho_{i}$. There is a cutoff distance, $r_{cut}$, which limits the
393 summations in the {\sc eam} equation to the few dozen atoms
394 surrounding atom $i$ for both the density $\rho$ and pairwise $\phi$
395 interactions.
396
397 \subsection{\label{Sec:pbc}Periodic Boundary Conditions}
398
399 \textit{Periodic boundary conditions} are widely used to simulate truly
400 macroscopic systems with a relatively small number of particles. The
401 simulation box is replicated throughout space to form an infinite
402 lattice. During the simulation, when a particle moves in the primary
403 cell, its image in other boxes move in exactly the same direction with
404 exactly the same orientation.Thus, as a particle leaves the primary
405 cell, one of its images will enter through the opposite face.If the
406 simulation box is large enough to avoid "feeling" the symmetries of
407 the periodic lattice, surface effects can be ignored. Cubic,
408 orthorhombic and parallelepiped are the available periodic cells In
409 OOPSE. We use a matrix to describe the property of the simulation
410 box. Therefore, both the size and shape of the simulation box can be
411 changed during the simulation. The transformation from box space
412 vector $\mathbf{s}$ to its corresponding real space vector
413 $\mathbf{r}$ is defined by
414 \begin{equation}
415 \mathbf{r}=\underline{\underline{H}}\cdot\mathbf{s}%
416 \end{equation}
417
418
419 where $H=(h_{x},h_{y},h_{z})$ is a transformation matrix made up of
420 the three box axis vectors. $h_{x},h_{y}$ and $h_{z}$ represent the
421 three sides of the simulation box respectively.
422
423 To find the minimum image, we convert the real vector to its
424 corresponding vector in box space first, \bigskip%
425 \begin{equation}
426 \mathbf{s}=\underline{\underline{H}}^{-1}\cdot\mathbf{r}%
427 \end{equation}
428 And then, each element of $\mathbf{s}$ is wrapped to lie between -0.5 to 0.5,
429 \begin{equation}
430 s_{i}^{\prime}=s_{i}-round(s_{i})
431 \end{equation}
432 where
433
434 %
435
436 \begin{equation}
437 round(x)=\left\{
438 \begin{array}[c]{c}%
439 \lfloor{x+0.5}\rfloor & \text{if \ }x\geqslant0\\
440 \lceil{x-0.5}\rceil & \text{otherwise}%
441 \end{array}
442 \right.
443 \end{equation}
444
445
446 For example, $round(3.6)=4$,$round(3.1)=3$, $round(-3.6)=-4$,
447 $round(-3.1)=-3$.
448
449 Finally, we obtain the minimum image coordinates by transforming back
450 to real space,%
451
452 \begin{equation}
453 \mathbf{r}^{\prime}=\underline{\underline{H}}^{-1}\cdot\mathbf{s}^{\prime}%
454 \end{equation}
455