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

Comparing trunk/ssdePaper/nptSSD.tex (file contents):
Revision 861 by chrisfen, Wed Nov 12 13:37:15 2003 UTC vs.
Revision 862 by chrisfen, Wed Nov 12 22:23:14 2003 UTC

# Line 1 | Line 1
1   %\documentclass[prb,aps,times,twocolumn,tabularx]{revtex4}
2 < \documentclass[prb,aps,times,tabularx,preprint]{revtex4}
2 > \documentclass[11pt]{article}
3 > \usepackage{endfloat}
4   \usepackage{amsmath}
5 + \usepackage{epsf}
6 + \usepackage{berkeley}
7 + \usepackage{setspace}
8 + \usepackage{tabularx}
9   \usepackage{graphicx}
10 <
6 < %\usepackage{endfloat}
10 > \usepackage[ref]{overcite}
11   %\usepackage{berkeley}
8 %\usepackage{epsf}
9 %\usepackage[ref]{overcite}
10 %\usepackage{setspace}
11 %\usepackage{tabularx}
12 %\usepackage{graphicx}
12   %\usepackage{curves}
13 < %\usepackage{amsmath}
14 < %\pagestyle{plain}
15 < %\pagenumbering{arabic}
16 < %\oddsidemargin 0.0cm \evensidemargin 0.0cm
17 < %\topmargin -21pt \headsep 10pt
18 < %\textheight 9.0in \textwidth 6.5in
19 < %\brokenpenalty=10000
20 < %\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.2}
22 < %\renewcommand\citemid{\ } % no comma in optional reference note
13 > \pagestyle{plain}
14 > \pagenumbering{arabic}
15 > \oddsidemargin 0.0cm \evensidemargin 0.0cm
16 > \topmargin -21pt \headsep 10pt
17 > \textheight 9.0in \textwidth 6.5in
18 > \brokenpenalty=10000
19 > \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.2}
20 > \renewcommand\citemid{\ } % no comma in optional reference note
21  
22   \begin{document}
23  
24   \title{On the temperature dependent properties of the soft sticky dipole (SSD) and related single point water models}
25  
26 < \author{Christopher J. Fennell and J. Daniel Gezelter{\thefootnote}
27 < \footnote[1]{Corresponding author. \ Electronic mail: gezelter@nd.edu}}
30 <
31 < \address{Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry\\ University of Notre Dame\\
26 > \author{Christopher J. Fennell and J. Daniel Gezelter\footnote{Corresponding author. \ Electronic mail: gezelter@nd.edu} \\
27 > Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry\\ University of Notre Dame\\
28   Notre Dame, Indiana 46556}
29  
30   \date{\today}
31  
32 + \maketitle
33 +
34   \begin{abstract}
35   NVE and NPT molecular dynamics simulations were performed in order to
36   investigate the density maximum and temperature dependent transport
# Line 50 | Line 48 | maintain or improve upon the structural and transport
48   maintain or improve upon the structural and transport properties.
49   \end{abstract}
50  
51 < \maketitle
51 > \newpage
52  
53   %\narrowtext
54  
# Line 61 | Line 59 | One of the most important tasks in simulations of bioc
59  
60   \section{Introduction}
61  
62 < One of the most important tasks in simulations of biochemical systems
63 < is the proper depiction of water and water solvation. In fact, the
64 < bulk of the calculations performed in solvated simulations are of
62 > One of the most important tasks in the simulation of biochemical
63 > systems is the proper depiction of water and water solvation. In fact,
64 > the bulk of the calculations performed in solvated simulations are of
65   interactions with or between solvent molecules. Thus, the outcomes of
66   these types of simulations are highly dependent on the physical
67 < properties of water, both as individual molecules and in
68 < groups/bulk. Due to the fact that explicit solvent accounts for a
69 < massive portion of the calculations, it necessary to simplify the
70 < solvent to some extent in order to complete simulations in a
71 < reasonable amount of time. In the case of simulating water in
72 < bio-molecular studies, the balance between accurate properties and
73 < computational efficiency is especially delicate, and it has resulted
74 < in a variety of different water
75 < models.\cite{Jorgensen83,Berendsen87,Jorgensen00} Many of these models
76 < get specific properties correct or better than their predecessors, but
77 < this is often at a cost of some other properties or of computer
78 < time. As an example, compare TIP3P or TIP4P to TIP5P. TIP5P succeeds
79 < in improving the structural and transport properties over its
82 < predecessors, yet this comes at a greater than 50\% increase in
67 > properties of water, both as individual molecules and in clusters or
68 > bulk. Due to the fact that explicit solvent accounts for a massive
69 > portion of the calculations, it necessary to simplify the solvent to
70 > some extent in order to complete simulations in a reasonable amount of
71 > time. In the case of simulating water in biomolecular studies, the
72 > balance between accurate properties and computational efficiency is
73 > especially delicate, and it has resulted in a variety of different
74 > water models.\cite{Jorgensen83,Berendsen87,Jorgensen00} Many of these
75 > models predict specific properties more accurately than their
76 > predecessors, but often at the cost of other properties or of computer
77 > time. As an example, compare TIP3P or TIP4P to TIP5P. TIP5P improves
78 > upon the structural and transport properties of water relative to the
79 > previous TIP models, yet this comes at a greater than 50\% increase in
80   computational cost.\cite{Jorgensen01,Jorgensen00} One recently
81 < developed model that succeeds in both retaining accuracy of system
81 > developed model that succeeds in both retaining the accuracy of system
82   properties and simplifying calculations to increase computational
83   efficiency is the Soft Sticky Dipole water model.\cite{Ichiye96}
84  
# Line 100 | Line 97 | where the $\mathbf{r}_{ij}$ is the position vector bet
97   (\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j),
98   \end{equation}
99   where the $\mathbf{r}_{ij}$ is the position vector between molecules
100 < \emph{i} and \emph{j} with magnitude equal to the distance $r_ij$, and
100 > \emph{i} and \emph{j} with magnitude equal to the distance $r_{ij}$, and
101   $\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i$ and $\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j$ represent the
102   orientations of the respective molecules. The Lennard-Jones, dipole,
103   and sticky parts of the potential are giving by the following
104 < equations,
104 > equations:
105   \begin{equation}
106   u_{ij}^{LJ}(r_{ij}) = 4\epsilon \left[\left(\frac{\sigma}{r_{ij}}\right)^{12}-\left(\frac{\sigma}{r_{ij}}\right)^{6}\right],
107   \end{equation}
# Line 112 | Line 109 | u_{ij}^{dp} = \frac{\boldsymbol{\mu}_i\cdot\boldsymbol
109   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}\ ,
110   \end{equation}
111   \begin{equation}
115 \begin{split}
112   u_{ij}^{sp}
113 < (\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)
114 < &=
119 < \frac{\nu_0}{2}[s(r_{ij})w(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)\\
120 < & \quad \ +
121 < s^\prime(r_{ij})w^\prime(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)]\ ,
122 < \end{split}
113 > (\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j) =
114 > \frac{\nu_0}{2}[s(r_{ij})w(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j) + s^\prime(r_{ij})w^\prime(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)]\ ,
115   \end{equation}
116   where $\boldsymbol{\mu}_i$ and $\boldsymbol{\mu}_j$ are the dipole
117   unit vectors of particles \emph{i} and \emph{j} with magnitude 2.35 D,
118 < $\nu_0$ scales the strength of the overall sticky potential, $s$ and
119 < $s^\prime$ are cubic switching functions. The $w$ and $w^\prime$
120 < functions take the following forms,
118 > $\nu_0$ scales the strength of the overall sticky potential, and $s$
119 > and $s^\prime$ are cubic switching functions. The $w$ and $w^\prime$
120 > functions take the following forms:
121   \begin{equation}
122   w(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)=\sin\theta_{ij}\sin2\theta_{ij}\cos2\phi_{ij},
123   \end{equation}
# Line 142 | Line 134 | simulations using this model, Ichiye \emph{et al.} rep
134  
135   Being that this is a one-site point dipole model, the actual force
136   calculations are simplified significantly. In the original Monte Carlo
137 < simulations using this model, Ichiye \emph{et al.} reported a
138 < calculation speed up of up to an order of magnitude over other
139 < comparable models, while maintaining the structural behavior of
137 > simulations using this model, Ichiye \emph{et al.} reported an
138 > increase in calculation efficiency of up to an order of magnitude over
139 > other comparable models, while maintaining the structural behavior of
140   water.\cite{Ichiye96} In the original molecular dynamics studies, it
141   was shown that SSD improves on the prediction of many of water's
142   dynamical properties over TIP3P and SPC/E.\cite{Ichiye99} This
# Line 156 | Line 148 | computational burdens with their respective ideal $N^\
148   has been parameterized for use with the Ewald Sum technique for the
149   handling of long-ranged interactions.  When studying very large
150   systems, the Ewald summation and even particle-mesh Ewald become
151 < computational burdens with their respective ideal $N^\frac{3}{2}$ and
151 > computational burdens, with their respective ideal $N^\frac{3}{2}$ and
152   $N\log N$ calculation scaling orders for $N$ particles.\cite{Darden99}
153   In applying this water model in these types of systems, it would be
154   useful to know its properties and behavior with the more
155   computationally efficient reaction field (RF) technique, and even with
156 < a cutoff that lacks any form of long range correction. This study
156 > a cutoff that lacks any form of long-range correction. This study
157   addresses these issues by looking at the structural and transport
158 < behavior of SSD over a variety of temperatures, with the purpose of
159 < utilizing the RF correction technique. Toward the end, we suggest
160 < alterations to the parameters that result in more water-like
161 < behavior. It should be noted that in a recent publication, some the
162 < original investigators of the SSD water model have put forth
163 < adjustments to the SSD water model to address abnormal density
164 < behavior (also observed here), calling the corrected model
165 < SSD1.\cite{Ichiye03} This study will make comparisons with this new
166 < model's behavior with the goal of improving upon the depiction of
175 < water under conditions without the Ewald Sum.
158 > behavior of SSD over a variety of temperatures with the purpose of
159 > utilizing the RF correction technique. We then suggest alterations to
160 > the parameters that result in more water-like behavior. It should be
161 > noted that in a recent publication, some of the original investigators of
162 > the SSD water model have put forth adjustments to the SSD water model
163 > to address abnormal density behavior (also observed here), calling the
164 > corrected model SSD1.\cite{Ichiye03} This study will make comparisons
165 > with SSD1's behavior with the goal of improving upon the
166 > depiction of water under conditions without the Ewald Sum.
167  
168   \section{Methods}
169  
170 < As stated previously, in this study the long-range dipole-dipole
171 < interactions were accounted for using the reaction field method. The
170 > As stated previously, the long-range dipole-dipole interactions were
171 > accounted for in this study by using the reaction field method. The
172   magnitude of the reaction field acting on dipole \emph{i} is given by
173   \begin{equation}
174   \mathcal{E}_{i} = \frac{2(\varepsilon_{s} - 1)}{2\varepsilon_{s} + 1}
# Line 198 | Line 189 | large-scale system, the computational cost benefit of
189   in the length of the cutoff radius.\cite{Berendsen98} This variable
190   behavior makes reaction field a less attractive method than other
191   methods, like the Ewald summation; however, for the simulation of
192 < large-scale system, the computational cost benefit of reaction field
192 > large-scale systems, the computational cost benefit of reaction field
193   is dramatic. To address some of the dynamical property alterations due
194   to the use of reaction field, simulations were also performed without
195 < a surrounding dielectric and suggestions are proposed on how to make
195 > a surrounding dielectric and suggestions are presented on how to make
196   SSD more accurate both with and without a reaction field.
197  
198   Simulations were performed in both the isobaric-isothermal and
# Line 214 | Line 205 | al.}.\cite{Dullweber1997} The reason for this integrat
205  
206   Integration of the equations of motion was carried out using the
207   symplectic splitting method proposed by Dullweber \emph{et
208 < al.}.\cite{Dullweber1997} The reason for this integrator selection
208 > al.}\cite{Dullweber1997} The reason for this integrator selection
209   deals with poor energy conservation of rigid body systems using
210   quaternions. While quaternions work well for orientational motion in
211   alternate ensembles, the microcanonical ensemble has a constant energy
# Line 227 | Line 218 | feasible a option, being that the rotation matrix for
218   The key difference in the integration method proposed by Dullweber
219   \emph{et al.} is that the entire rotation matrix is propagated from
220   one time step to the next. In the past, this would not have been as
221 < feasible a option, being that the rotation matrix for a single body is
221 > feasible an option, being that the rotation matrix for a single body is
222   nine elements long as opposed to 3 or 4 elements for Euler angles and
223   quaternions respectively. System memory has become much less of an
224   issue in recent times, and this has resulted in substantial benefits
# Line 238 | Line 229 | both linear and angular motion of rigid bodies. In the
229   purposes relieves this burden.
230  
231   The symplectic splitting method allows for Verlet style integration of
232 < both linear and angular motion of rigid bodies. In the integration
232 > both linear and angular motion of rigid bodies. In this integration
233   method, the orientational propagation involves a sequence of matrix
234   evaluations to update the rotation matrix.\cite{Dullweber1997} These
235 < matrix rotations end up being more costly computationally than the
236 < simpler arithmetic quaternion propagation. With the same time step, a
237 < 1000 SSD particle simulation shows an average 7\% increase in
238 < computation time using the symplectic step method in place of
239 < quaternions. This cost is more than justified when comparing the
240 < energy conservation of the two methods as illustrated in figure
250 < \ref{timestep}.
235 > matrix rotations are more costly computationally than the simpler
236 > arithmetic quaternion propagation. With the same time step, a 1000 SSD
237 > particle simulation shows an average 7\% increase in computation time
238 > using the symplectic step method in place of quaternions. This cost is
239 > more than justified when comparing the energy conservation of the two
240 > methods as illustrated in figure \ref{timestep}.
241  
242   \begin{figure}
243 < \includegraphics[width=61mm, angle=-90]{timeStep.epsi}
243 > \begin{center}
244 > \epsfxsize=6in
245 > \epsfbox{timeStep.epsi}
246   \caption{Energy conservation using quaternion based integration versus
247   the symplectic step method proposed by Dullweber \emph{et al.} with
248 < increasing time step. For each time step, the dotted line is total
249 < energy using the symplectic step integrator, and the solid line comes
258 < from the quaternion integrator. The larger time step plots are shifted
259 < up from the true energy baseline for clarity.}
248 > increasing time step. The larger time step plots are shifted up from
249 > the true energy baseline (that of $\Delta t$ = 0.1 fs) for clarity.}
250   \label{timestep}
251 + \end{center}
252   \end{figure}
253  
254   In figure \ref{timestep}, the resulting energy drift at various time
255   steps for both the symplectic step and quaternion integration schemes
256   is compared. All of the 1000 SSD particle simulations started with the
257 < same configuration, and the only difference was the method for
258 < handling rotational motion. At time steps of 0.1 and 0.5 fs, both
257 > same configuration, and the only difference was the method used to
258 > handle rotational motion. At time steps of 0.1 and 0.5 fs, both
259   methods for propagating particle rotation conserve energy fairly well,
260   with the quaternion method showing a slight energy drift over time in
261   the 0.5 fs time step simulation. At time steps of 1 and 2 fs, the
# Line 273 | Line 264 | Energy drift in these SSD particle simulations was unn
264   conservation, one can take considerably longer time steps, leading to
265   an overall reduction in computation time.
266  
267 < Energy drift in these SSD particle simulations was unnoticeable for
267 > Energy drift in the symplectic step simulations was unnoticeable for
268   time steps up to three femtoseconds. A slight energy drift on the
269   order of 0.012 kcal/mol per nanosecond was observed at a time step of
270   four femtoseconds, and as expected, this drift increases dramatically
# Line 282 | Line 273 | starting points for all the simulations. The $I_h$ cry
273   constant pressure simulations as well.
274  
275   Ice crystals in both the $I_h$ and $I_c$ lattices were generated as
276 < starting points for all the simulations. The $I_h$ crystals were
277 < formed by first arranging the center of masses of the SSD particles
278 < into a ``hexagonal'' ice lattice of 1024 particles. Because of the
279 < crystal structure of $I_h$ ice, the simulation box assumed a
280 < rectangular shape with a edge length ratio of approximately
276 > starting points for all simulations. The $I_h$ crystals were formed by
277 > first arranging the centers of mass of the SSD particles into a
278 > ``hexagonal'' ice lattice of 1024 particles. Because of the crystal
279 > structure of $I_h$ ice, the simulation box assumed a rectangular shape
280 > with an edge length ratio of approximately
281   1.00$\times$1.06$\times$1.23. The particles were then allowed to
282   orient freely about fixed positions with angular momenta randomized at
283   400 K for varying times. The rotational temperature was then scaled
284 < down in stages to slowly cool the crystals down to 25 K. The particles
285 < were then allowed translate with fixed orientations at a constant
284 > down in stages to slowly cool the crystals to 25 K. The particles were
285 > then allowed to translate with fixed orientations at a constant
286   pressure of 1 atm for 50 ps at 25 K. Finally, all constraints were
287   removed and the ice crystals were allowed to equilibrate for 50 ps at
288   25 K and a constant pressure of 1 atm.  This procedure resulted in
289   structurally stable $I_h$ ice crystals that obey the Bernal-Fowler
290 < rules\cite{Bernal33,Rahman72}.  This method was also utilized in the
290 > rules.\cite{Bernal33,Rahman72} This method was also utilized in the
291   making of diamond lattice $I_c$ ice crystals, with each cubic
292   simulation box consisting of either 512 or 1000 particles. Only
293   isotropic volume fluctuations were performed under constant pressure,
# Line 306 | Line 297 | constant pressure and temperature dynamics. By perform
297   \section{Results and discussion}
298  
299   Melting studies were performed on the randomized ice crystals using
300 < constant pressure and temperature dynamics. By performing melting
301 < simulations, the melting transition can be determined by monitoring
302 < the heat capacity, in addition to determining the density maximum -
303 < provided that the density maximum occurs in the liquid and not the
304 < supercooled regime. An ensemble average from five separate melting
305 < simulations was acquired, each starting from different ice crystals
306 < generated as described previously. All simulations were equilibrated
307 < for 100 ps prior to a 200 ps data collection run at each temperature
308 < setting. The temperature range of study spanned from 25 to 400 K, with
309 < a maximum degree increment of 25 K. For regions of interest along this
310 < stepwise progression, the temperature increment was decreased from 25
311 < K to 10 and 5 K. The above equilibration and production times were
312 < sufficient in that the system volume fluctuations dampened out in all
313 < but the very cold simulations (below 225 K).
300 > constant pressure and temperature dynamics. During melting
301 > simulations, the melting transition and the density maximum can both
302 > be observed, provided that the density maximum occurs in the liquid
303 > and not the supercooled regime. An ensemble average from five separate
304 > melting simulations was acquired, each starting from different ice
305 > crystals generated as described previously. All simulations were
306 > equilibrated for 100 ps prior to a 200 ps data collection run at each
307 > temperature setting. The temperature range of study spanned from 25 to
308 > 400 K, with a maximum degree increment of 25 K. For regions of
309 > interest along this stepwise progression, the temperature increment
310 > was decreased from 25 K to 10 and 5 K. The above equilibration and
311 > production times were sufficient in that the system volume
312 > fluctuations dampened out in all but the very cold simulations (below
313 > 225 K).
314  
315   \subsection{Density Behavior}
316   Initial simulations focused on the original SSD water model, and an
# Line 330 | Line 321 | configuration; and though not pictured, the simulation
321   of the average value at 260 K makes a good argument for the actual
322   density maximum residing at this midpoint value. Figure \ref{dense1}
323   was constructed using ice $I_h$ crystals for the initial
324 < configuration; and though not pictured, the simulations starting from
325 < ice $I_c$ crystal configurations showed similar results, with a
324 > configuration; though not pictured, the simulations starting from ice
325 > $I_c$ crystal configurations showed similar results, with a
326   liquid-phase density maximum in this same region (between 255 and 260
327   K). In addition, the $I_c$ crystals are more fragile than the $I_h$
328 < crystals, leading them to deform into a dense glassy state at lower
328 > crystals, leading to deformation into a dense glassy state at lower
329   temperatures. This resulted in an overall low temperature density
330 < maximum at 200 K, but they still retained a common liquid state
331 < density maximum with the $I_h$ simulations.
330 > maximum at 200 K, while still retaining a liquid state density maximum
331 > in common with the $I_h$ simulations.
332  
333   \begin{figure}
334 < \includegraphics[width=65mm,angle=-90]{dense2.eps}
335 < \caption{Density versus temperature for TIP4P\cite{Jorgensen98b},
336 < TIP3P\cite{Jorgensen98b}, SPC/E\cite{Clancy94}, SSD without Reaction
337 < Field, SSD, and Experiment\cite{CRC80}. The arrows indicate the
334 > \begin{center}
335 > \epsfxsize=6in
336 > \epsfbox{denseSSD.eps}
337 > \caption{Density versus temperature for TIP4P,\cite{Jorgensen98b}
338 > TIP3P,\cite{Jorgensen98b} SPC/E,\cite{Clancy94} SSD without Reaction
339 > Field, SSD, and experiment.\cite{CRC80} The arrows indicate the
340   change in densities observed when turning off the reaction field. The
341   the lower than expected densities for the SSD model were what
342   prompted the original reparameterization.\cite{Ichiye03}}
343   \label{dense1}
344 + \end{center}
345   \end{figure}
346  
347   The density maximum for SSD actually compares quite favorably to other
# Line 366 | Line 360 | the resulting densities overlapped within error and sh
360   address the possible affect of cutoff radius, simulations were
361   performed with a dipolar cutoff radius of 12.0 \AA\ to compliment the
362   previous SSD simulations, all performed with a cutoff of 9.0 \AA. All
363 < the resulting densities overlapped within error and showed no
364 < significant trend in lower or higher densities as a function of cutoff
365 < radius, both for simulations with and without reaction field. These
366 < results indicate that there is no major benefit in choosing a longer
367 < cutoff radius in simulations using SSD. This is comforting in that the
368 < use of a longer cutoff radius results in significant increases in the
369 < time required to obtain a single trajectory.
363 > of the resulting densities overlapped within error and showed no
364 > significant trend toward lower or higher densities as a function of
365 > cutoff radius, for simulations both with and without reaction
366 > field. These results indicate that there is no major benefit in
367 > choosing a longer cutoff radius in simulations using SSD. This is
368 > advantageous in that the use of a longer cutoff radius results in
369 > significant increases in the time required to obtain a single
370 > trajectory.
371  
372 < The most important thing to recognize in figure \ref{dense1} is the
373 < density scaling of SSD relative to other common models at any given
372 > The key feature to recognize in figure \ref{dense1} is the density
373 > scaling of SSD relative to other common models at any given
374   temperature. Note that the SSD model assumes a lower density than any
375   of the other listed models at the same pressure, behavior which is
376   especially apparent at temperatures greater than 300 K. Lower than
377 < expected densities have been observed for other systems with the use
378 < of a reaction field for long-range electrostatic interactions, so the
379 < most likely reason for these significantly lower densities in these
377 > expected densities have been observed for other systems using a
378 > reaction field for long-range electrostatic interactions, so the most
379 > likely reason for the significantly lower densities seen in these
380   simulations is the presence of the reaction
381   field.\cite{Berendsen98,Nezbeda02} In order to test the effect of the
382   reaction field on the density of the systems, the simulations were
383   repeated without a reaction field present. The results of these
384   simulations are also displayed in figure \ref{dense1}. Without
385 < reaction field, these densities increase considerably to more
385 > reaction field, the densities increase considerably to more
386   experimentally reasonable values, especially around the freezing point
387   of liquid water. The shape of the curve is similar to the curve
388   produced from SSD simulations using reaction field, specifically the
389   rapidly decreasing densities at higher temperatures; however, a shift
390 < in the density maximum location, down to 245 K, is observed. This is
391 < probably a more accurate comparison to the other listed water models,
392 < in that no long range corrections were applied in those
390 > in the density maximum location, down to 245 K, is observed. This is a
391 > more accurate comparison to the other listed water models, in that no
392 > long range corrections were applied in those
393   simulations.\cite{Clancy94,Jorgensen98b} However, even without a
394   reaction field, the density around 300 K is still significantly lower
395   than experiment and comparable water models. This anomalous behavior
# Line 404 | Line 399 | of the particles and how they change when altering the
399  
400   \subsection{Transport Behavior}
401   Of importance in these types of studies are the transport properties
402 < of the particles and how they change when altering the environmental
403 < conditions. In order to probe transport, constant energy simulations
404 < were performed about the average density uncovered by the constant
405 < pressure simulations. Simulations started with randomized velocities
406 < and underwent 50 ps of temperature scaling and 50 ps of constant
407 < energy equilibration before obtaining a 200 ps trajectory. Diffusion
408 < constants were calculated via root-mean square deviation analysis. The
409 < averaged results from 5 sets of these NVE simulations is displayed in
410 < figure \ref{diffuse}, alongside experimental, SPC/E, and TIP5P
411 < results.\cite{Gillen72,Mills73,Clancy94,Jorgensen01}
402 > of the particles and their change in responce to altering
403 > environmental conditions. In order to probe transport, constant energy
404 > simulations were performed about the average density uncovered by the
405 > constant pressure simulations. Simulations started with randomized
406 > velocities and underwent 50 ps of temperature scaling and 50 ps of
407 > constant energy equilibration before obtaining a 200 ps
408 > trajectory. Diffusion constants were calculated via root-mean square
409 > deviation analysis. The averaged results from five sets of NVE
410 > simulations are displayed in figure \ref{diffuse}, alongside
411 > experimental, SPC/E, and TIP5P
412 > results.\cite{Gillen72,Mills73,Clancy94,Jorgensen01}
413  
414   \begin{figure}
415 < \includegraphics[width=65mm, angle=-90]{betterDiffuse.epsi}
415 > \begin{center}
416 > \epsfxsize=6in
417 > \epsfbox{betterDiffuse.epsi}
418   \caption{Average diffusion coefficient over increasing temperature for
419 < SSD, SPC/E\cite{Clancy94}, TIP5P\cite{Jorgensen01}, and Experimental
420 < data from Gillen \emph{et al.}\cite{Gillen72}, and from
421 < Mills\cite{Mills73}.}
419 > SSD, SPC/E,\cite{Clancy94} TIP5P,\cite{Jorgensen01} and Experimental
420 > data.\cite{Gillen72,Mills73} Of the three water models shown, SSD has
421 > the least deviation from the experimental values. The rapidly
422 > increasing diffusion constants for TIP5P and SSD correspond to
423 > significant decrease in density at the higher temperatures.}
424   \label{diffuse}
425 + \end{center}
426   \end{figure}
427  
428   The observed values for the diffusion constant point out one of the
429   strengths of the SSD model. Of the three experimental models shown,
430   the SSD model has the most accurate depiction of the diffusion trend
431 < seen in experiment in both the supercooled and normal regimes. SPC/E
432 < does a respectable job by getting similar values as SSD and experiment
433 < around 290 K; however, it deviates at both higher and lower
434 < temperatures, failing to predict the experimental trend. TIP5P and SSD
435 < both start off low at the colder temperatures and tend to diffuse too
436 < rapidly at the higher temperatures. This type of trend at the higher
437 < temperatures is not surprising in that the densities of both TIP5P and
438 < SSD are lower than experimental water at temperatures higher than room
439 < temperature. When calculating the diffusion coefficients for SSD at
431 > seen in experiment in both the supercooled and liquid temperature
432 > regimes. SPC/E does a respectable job by producing values similar to
433 > SSD and experiment around 290 K; however, it deviates at both higher
434 > and lower temperatures, failing to predict the experimental
435 > trend. TIP5P and SSD both start off low at colder temperatures and
436 > tend to diffuse too rapidly at higher temperatures. This trend at
437 > higher temperatures is not surprising in that the densities of both
438 > TIP5P and SSD are lower than experimental water at these higher
439 > temperatures. When calculating the diffusion coefficients for SSD at
440   experimental densities, the resulting values fall more in line with
441   experiment at these temperatures, albeit not at standard pressure.
442  
443   \subsection{Structural Changes and Characterization}
444   By starting the simulations from the crystalline state, the melting
445   transition and the ice structure can be studied along with the liquid
446 < phase behavior beyond the melting point. To locate the melting
447 < transition, the constant pressure heat capacity (C$_\text{p}$) was
448 < monitored in each of the simulations. In the melting simulations of
449 < the 1024 particle ice $I_h$ simulations, a large spike in C$_\text{p}$
450 < occurs at 245 K, indicating a first order phase transition for the
451 < melting of these ice crystals. When the reaction field is turned off,
452 < the melting transition occurs at 235 K.  These melting transitions are
453 < considerably lower than the experimental value, but this is not
454 < surprising when considering the simplicity of the SSD model.
446 > phase behavior beyond the melting point. The constant pressure heat
447 > capacity (C$_\text{p}$) was monitored to locate the melting transition
448 > in each of the simulations. In the melting simulations of the 1024
449 > particle ice $I_h$ simulations, a large spike in C$_\text{p}$ occurs
450 > at 245 K, indicating a first order phase transition for the melting of
451 > these ice crystals. When the reaction field is turned off, the melting
452 > transition occurs at 235 K.  These melting transitions are
453 > considerably lower than the experimental value, but this is not a
454 > surprise considering the simplicity of the SSD model.
455  
456 < \begin{figure}
457 < \includegraphics[width=85mm]{fullContours.eps}
456 > \begin{figure}
457 > \begin{center}
458 > \epsfxsize=6in
459 > \epsfbox{corrDiag.eps}
460 > \caption{Two dimensional illustration of angles involved in the
461 > correlations observed in figure \ref{contour}.}
462 > \label{corrAngle}
463 > \end{center}
464 > \end{figure}
465 >
466 > \begin{figure}
467 > \begin{center}
468 > \epsfxsize=6in
469 > \epsfbox{fullContours.eps}
470   \caption{Contour plots of 2D angular g($r$)'s for 512 SSD systems at
471   100 K (A \& B) and 300 K (C \& D). Contour colors are inverted for
472   clarity: dark areas signify peaks while light areas signify
473   depressions. White areas have g(\emph{r}) values below 0.5 and black
474   areas have values above 1.5.}
475   \label{contour}
476 + \end{center}
477   \end{figure}
478  
465 \begin{figure}
466 \includegraphics[width=45mm]{corrDiag.eps}
467 \caption{Two dimensional illustration of the angles involved in the
468 correlations observed in figure \ref{contour}.}
469 \label{corrAngle}
470 \end{figure}
471
479   Additional analysis of the melting phase-transition process was
480   performed by using two-dimensional structure and dipole angle
481   correlations. Expressions for these correlations are as follows:
482  
483 < \begin{multline}
484 < g_{\text{AB}}(r,\cos\theta) = \\
485 < \frac{V}{N_\text{A}N_\text{B}}\langle\sum_{i\in\text{A}}\sum_{j\in\text{B}}\delta(\cos\theta-\cos\theta_{ij})\delta(r-\left|\mathbf{r}_{ij}\right|)\rangle\ ,
486 < \end{multline}
487 < \begin{multline}
481 < g_{\text{AB}}(r,\cos\omega) = \\
483 > \begin{equation}
484 > g_{\text{AB}}(r,\cos\theta) = \frac{V}{N_\text{A}N_\text{B}}\langle\sum_{i\in\text{A}}\sum_{j\in\text{B}}\delta(\cos\theta-\cos\theta_{ij})\delta(r-\left|\mathbf{r}_{ij}\right|)\rangle\ ,
485 > \end{equation}
486 > \begin{equation}
487 > g_{\text{AB}}(r,\cos\omega) =
488   \frac{V}{N_\text{A}N_\text{B}}\langle\sum_{i\in\text{A}}\sum_{j\in\text{B}}\delta(\cos\omega-\cos\omega_{ij})\delta(r-\left|\mathbf{r}_{ij}\right|)\rangle\ ,
489 < \end{multline}
489 > \end{equation}
490   where $\theta$ and $\omega$ refer to the angles shown in figure
491   \ref{corrAngle}. By binning over both distance and the cosine of the
492   desired angle between the two dipoles, the g(\emph{r}) can be
# Line 506 | Line 512 | second solvation shell peak appears to have two distin
512   This complex interplay between dipole and sticky interactions was
513   remarked upon as a possible reason for the split second peak in the
514   oxygen-oxygen g(\emph{r}).\cite{Ichiye96} At low temperatures, the
515 < second solvation shell peak appears to have two distinct parts that
516 < blend together to form one observable peak. At higher temperatures,
517 < this split character alters to show the leading 4 \AA\ peak dominated
518 < by equatorial anti-parallel dipole orientations, and there is tightly
519 < bunched group of axially arranged dipoles that most likely consist of
520 < the smaller fraction aligned dipole pairs. The trailing part of the
521 < split peak at 5 \AA\ is dominated by aligned dipoles that range
522 < primarily within the axial to the chief hydrogen bond arrangements
523 < similar to those seen in the first solvation shell. This evidence
524 < indicates that the dipole pair interaction begins to dominate outside
525 < of the range of the dipolar repulsion term, with the primary
526 < energetically favorable dipole arrangements populating the region
527 < immediately outside this repulsion region (around 4 \AA), and
528 < arrangements that seek to ideally satisfy both the sticky and dipole
529 < forces locate themselves just beyond this initial buildup (around 5
524 < \AA).
515 > second solvation shell peak appears to have two distinct components
516 > that blend together to form one observable peak. At higher
517 > temperatures, this split character alters to show the leading 4 \AA\
518 > peak dominated by equatorial anti-parallel dipole orientations. There
519 > is also a tightly bunched group of axially arranged dipoles that most
520 > likely consist of the smaller fraction of aligned dipole pairs. The
521 > trailing component of the split peak at 5 \AA\ is dominated by aligned
522 > dipoles that assume hydrogen bond arrangements similar to those seen
523 > in the first solvation shell. This evidence indicates that the dipole
524 > pair interaction begins to dominate outside of the range of the
525 > dipolar repulsion term. Primary energetically favorable dipole
526 > arrangements populate the region immediately outside this repulsion
527 > region (around 4 \AA), while arrangements that seek to ideally satisfy
528 > both the sticky and dipole forces locate themselves just beyond this
529 > initial buildup (around 5 \AA).
530  
531   From these findings, the split second peak is primarily the product of
532   the dipolar repulsion term of the sticky potential. In fact, the inner
# Line 529 | Line 534 | because the second solvation shell will still be shift
534   extending the switching function cutoff ($s^\prime(r_{ij})$) from its
535   normal 4.0 \AA\ to values of 4.5 or even 5 \AA. This type of
536   correction is not recommended for improving the liquid structure,
537 < because the second solvation shell will still be shifted too far
537 > since the second solvation shell would still be shifted too far
538   out. In addition, this would have an even more detrimental effect on
539   the system densities, leading to a liquid with a more open structure
540   and a density considerably lower than the normal SSD behavior shown
# Line 548 | Line 553 | The possible parameters for tuning include the $\sigma
553   important properties. In this case, it would be ideal to correct the
554   densities while maintaining the accurate transport properties.
555  
556 < The possible parameters for tuning include the $\sigma$ and $\epsilon$
556 > The parameters available for tuning include the $\sigma$ and $\epsilon$
557   Lennard-Jones parameters, the dipole strength ($\mu$), and the sticky
558   attractive and dipole repulsive terms with their respective
559   cutoffs. To alter the attractive and repulsive terms of the sticky
560   potential independently, it is necessary to separate the terms as
561   follows:
562   \begin{equation}
558 \begin{split}
563   u_{ij}^{sp}
564 < (\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j) &=
565 < \frac{\nu_0}{2}[s(r_{ij})w(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)]\\
562 < & \quad \ + \frac{\nu_0^\prime}{2}
563 < [s^\prime(r_{ij})w^\prime(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)],
564 < \end{split}
564 > (\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j) =
565 > \frac{\nu_0}{2}[s(r_{ij})w(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)] + \frac{\nu_0^\prime}{2} [s^\prime(r_{ij})w^\prime(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)],
566   \end{equation}
567  
568   where $\nu_0$ scales the strength of the tetrahedral attraction and
569   $\nu_0^\prime$ acts in an identical fashion on the dipole repulsion
570 < term. For purposes of the reparameterization, the separation was
571 < performed, but the final parameters were adjusted so that it is
572 < unnecessary to separate the terms when implementing the adjusted water
573 < potentials. The results of the reparameterizations are shown in table
574 < \ref{params}. Note that both the tetrahedral attractive and dipolar
575 < repulsive don't share the same lower cutoff ($r_l$) in the newly
576 < parameterized potentials - soft sticky dipole reaction field (SSD/RF -
577 < for use with a reaction field) and soft sticky dipole enhanced (SSD/E
578 < - an attempt to improve the liquid structure in simulations without a
579 < long-range correction).
570 > term. The separation was performed for purposes of the
571 > reparameterization, but the final parameters were adjusted so that it
572 > is unnecessary to separate the terms when implementing the adjusted
573 > water potentials. The results of the reparameterizations are shown in
574 > table \ref{params}. Note that the tetrahedral attractive and dipolar
575 > repulsive terms do not share the same lower cutoff ($r_l$) in the
576 > newly parameterized potentials - soft sticky dipole reaction field
577 > (SSD/RF - for use with a reaction field) and soft sticky dipole
578 > enhanced (SSD/E - an attempt to improve the liquid structure in
579 > simulations without a long-range correction).
580  
581   \begin{table}
582 + \begin{center}
583   \caption{Parameters for the original and adjusted models}
584   \begin{tabular}{ l  c  c  c  c }
585   \hline \\[-3mm]
586 < \ \ \ Parameters\ \ \  & \ \ \ SSD$^\dagger$ \ \ \ & \ SSD1$^\ddagger$\ \  & \ SSD/E\ \  & \ SSD/RF \\
586 > \ \ \ Parameters\ \ \  & \ \ \ SSD\cite{Ichiye96} \ \ \ & \ SSD1\cite{Ichiye03}\ \  & \ SSD/E\ \  & \ SSD/RF \\
587   \hline \\[-3mm]
588   \ \ \ $\sigma$ (\AA)  & 3.051 & 3.016 & 3.035 & 3.019\\
589   \ \ \ $\epsilon$ (kcal/mol) & 0.152 & 0.152 & 0.152 & 0.152\\
# Line 592 | Line 594 | long-range correction).
594   \ \ \ $\nu_0^\prime$ (kcal/mol) & 3.7284 & 3.6613 & 3.90 & 3.90\\
595   \ \ \ $r_l^\prime$ (\AA) & 2.75 & 2.75 & 2.75 & 2.75\\
596   \ \ \ $r_u^\prime$ (\AA) & 4.00 & 4.00 & 3.35 & 3.35\\
595 \\[-2mm]$^\dagger$ ref. \onlinecite{Ichiye96}
596 \\$^\ddagger$ ref. \onlinecite{Ichiye03}
597   \end{tabular}
598   \label{params}
599 + \end{center}
600   \end{table}
601  
602 < \begin{figure}
603 < \includegraphics[width=85mm]{GofRCompare.epsi}
602 > \begin{figure}
603 > \begin{center}
604 > \epsfxsize=5in
605 > \epsfbox{GofRCompare.epsi}
606   \caption{Plots comparing experiment\cite{Head-Gordon00_1} with SSD/E
607   and SSD1 without reaction field (top), as well as SSD/RF and SSD1 with
608   reaction field turned on (bottom). The insets show the respective
609 < first peaks in detail. Solid Line - experiment, dashed line - SSD/E
610 < and SSD/RF, and dotted line - SSD1 (with and without reaction field).}
609 > first peaks in detail. Note how the changes in parameters have lowered
610 > and broadened the first peak of SSD/E and SSD/RF.}
611   \label{grcompare}
612 + \end{center}
613   \end{figure}
614  
615 < \begin{figure}
616 < \includegraphics[width=85mm]{dualsticky.ps}
615 > \begin{figure}
616 > \begin{center}
617 > \epsfxsize=6in
618 > \epsfbox{dualsticky.ps}
619   \caption{Isosurfaces of the sticky potential for SSD1 (left) and SSD/E \&
620   SSD/RF (right). Light areas correspond to the tetrahedral attractive
621 < part, and the darker areas correspond to the dipolar repulsive part.}
621 > component, and darker areas correspond to the dipolar repulsive
622 > component.}
623   \label{isosurface}
624 + \end{center}
625   \end{figure}
626  
627   In the paper detailing the development of SSD, Liu and Ichiye placed
628   particular emphasis on an accurate description of the first solvation
629 < shell. This resulted in a somewhat tall and sharp first peak that
630 < integrated to give similar coordination numbers to the experimental
631 < data obtained by Soper and Phillips.\cite{Ichiye96,Soper86} New
632 < experimental x-ray scattering data from the Head-Gordon lab indicates
633 < a slightly lower and shifted first peak in the g$_\mathrm{OO}(r)$, so
634 < adjustments to SSD were made while taking into consideration the new
635 < experimental findings.\cite{Head-Gordon00_1} Figure \ref{grcompare}
636 < shows the relocation of the first peak of the oxygen-oxygen
637 < g(\emph{r}) by comparing the revised SSD model (SSD1), SSD-E, and
638 < SSD-RF to the new experimental results. Both the modified water models
639 < have shorter peaks that are brought in more closely to the
640 < experimental peak (as seen in the insets of figure \ref{grcompare}).
641 < This structural alteration was accomplished by the combined reduction
642 < in the Lennard-Jones $\sigma$ variable and adjustment of the sticky
643 < potential strength and cutoffs. As can be seen in table \ref{params},
644 < the cutoffs for the tetrahedral attractive and dipolar repulsive terms
645 < were nearly swapped with each other. Isosurfaces of the original and
646 < modified sticky potentials are shown in figure \cite{isosurface}. In
647 < these isosurfaces, it is easy to see how altering the cutoffs changes
648 < the repulsive and attractive character of the particles. With a
649 < reduced repulsive surface (the darker region), the particles can move
650 < closer to one another, increasing the density for the overall
651 < system. This change in interaction cutoff also results in a more
652 < gradual orientational motion by allowing the particles to maintain
653 < preferred dipolar arrangements before they begin to feel the pull of
654 < the tetrahedral restructuring. Upon moving closer together, the
655 < dipolar repulsion term becomes active and excludes unphysical
656 < nearest-neighbor arrangements. This compares with how SSD and SSD1
657 < exclude preferred dipole alignments before the particles feel the pull
658 < of the ``hydrogen bonds''. Aside from improving the shape of the first
659 < peak in the g(\emph{r}), this improves the densities considerably by
629 > shell. This resulted in a somewhat tall and narrow first peak in the
630 > g(\emph{r}) that integrated to give similar coordination numbers to
631 > the experimental data obtained by Soper and
632 > Phillips.\cite{Ichiye96,Soper86} New experimental x-ray scattering
633 > data from the Head-Gordon lab indicates a slightly lower and shifted
634 > first peak in the g$_\mathrm{OO}(r)$, so adjustments to SSD were made
635 > while taking into consideration the new experimental
636 > findings.\cite{Head-Gordon00_1} Figure \ref{grcompare} shows the
637 > relocation of the first peak of the oxygen-oxygen g(\emph{r}) by
638 > comparing the revised SSD model (SSD1), SSD-E, and SSD-RF to the new
639 > experimental results. Both modified water models have shorter peaks
640 > that are brought in more closely to the experimental peak (as seen in
641 > the insets of figure \ref{grcompare}).  This structural alteration was
642 > accomplished by the combined reduction in the Lennard-Jones $\sigma$
643 > variable and adjustment of the sticky potential strength and
644 > cutoffs. As can be seen in table \ref{params}, the cutoffs for the
645 > tetrahedral attractive and dipolar repulsive terms were nearly swapped
646 > with each other. Isosurfaces of the original and modified sticky
647 > potentials are shown in figure \ref{isosurface}. In these isosurfaces,
648 > it is easy to see how altering the cutoffs changes the repulsive and
649 > attractive character of the particles. With a reduced repulsive
650 > surface (darker region), the particles can move closer to one another,
651 > increasing the density for the overall system. This change in
652 > interaction cutoff also results in a more gradual orientational motion
653 > by allowing the particles to maintain preferred dipolar arrangements
654 > before they begin to feel the pull of the tetrahedral
655 > restructuring. As the particles move closer together, the dipolar
656 > repulsion term becomes active and excludes unphysical nearest-neighbor
657 > arrangements. This compares with how SSD and SSD1 exclude preferred
658 > dipole alignments before the particles feel the pull of the ``hydrogen
659 > bonds''. Aside from improving the shape of the first peak in the
660 > g(\emph{r}), this modification improves the densities considerably by
661   allowing the persistence of full dipolar character below the previous
662   4.0 \AA\ cutoff.
663  
664   While adjusting the location and shape of the first peak of
665   g(\emph{r}) improves the densities, these changes alone are
666   insufficient to bring the system densities up to the values observed
667 < experimentally. To finish bringing up the densities, the dipole
668 < moments were increased in both the adjusted models. Being a dipole
667 > experimentally. To further increase the densities, the dipole moments
668 > were increased in both of the adjusted models. Since SSD is a dipole
669   based model, the structure and transport are very sensitive to changes
670   in the dipole moment. The original SSD simply used the dipole moment
671   calculated from the TIP3P water model, which at 2.35 D is
# Line 664 | Line 673 | to values as high as 3.11 D, so there is quite a range
673   D. The larger dipole moment is a more realistic value and improves the
674   dielectric properties of the fluid. Both theoretical and experimental
675   measurements indicate a liquid phase dipole moment ranging from 2.4 D
676 < to values as high as 3.11 D, so there is quite a range of available
677 < values for a reasonable dipole
678 < moment.\cite{Sprik91,Kusalik02,Badyal00,Barriol64} The increasing of
679 < the dipole moments to 2.42 and 2.48 D for SSD/E and SSD/RF
680 < respectively is moderate in this range; however, it leads to
681 < significant changes in the density and transport of the water models.
676 > to values as high as 3.11 D, providing a substantial range of
677 > reasonable values for a dipole
678 > moment.\cite{Sprik91,Kusalik02,Badyal00,Barriol64} Moderately
679 > increasing the dipole moments to 2.42 and 2.48 D for SSD/E and SSD/RF,
680 > respectively, leads to significant changes in the density and
681 > transport of the water models.
682  
683   In order to demonstrate the benefits of these reparameterizations, a
684   series of NPT and NVE simulations were performed to probe the density
# Line 677 | Line 686 | results come from five separate simulations of 1024 pa
686   to the original SSD model. This comparison involved full NPT melting
687   sequences for both SSD/E and SSD/RF, as well as NVE transport
688   calculations at the calculated self-consistent densities. Again, the
689 < results come from five separate simulations of 1024 particle systems,
690 < and the melting sequences were started from different ice $I_h$
691 < crystals constructed as stated earlier. Like before, each NPT
689 > results are obtained from five separate simulations of 1024 particle
690 > systems, and the melting sequences were started from different ice
691 > $I_h$ crystals constructed as described previously. Each NPT
692   simulation was equilibrated for 100 ps before a 200 ps data collection
693 < run at each temperature step, and they used the final configuration
694 < from the previous temperature simulation as a starting point. All of
695 < the NVE simulations had the same thermalization, equilibration, and
696 < data collection times stated earlier in this paper.
693 > run at each temperature step, and the final configuration from the
694 > previous temperature simulation was used as a starting point. All NVE
695 > simulations had the same thermalization, equilibration, and data
696 > collection times as stated earlier in this paper.
697  
698 < \begin{figure}
699 < \includegraphics[width=62mm, angle=-90]{ssdeDense.epsi}
698 > \begin{figure}
699 > \begin{center}
700 > \epsfxsize=6in
701 > \epsfbox{ssdeDense.epsi}
702   \caption{Comparison of densities calculated with SSD/E to SSD1 without a
703 < reaction field, TIP3P\cite{Jorgensen98b}, TIP5P\cite{Jorgensen00},
704 < SPC/E\cite{Clancy94}, and Experiment\cite{CRC80}. The window shows a
703 > reaction field, TIP3P,\cite{Jorgensen98b} TIP5P,\cite{Jorgensen00}
704 > SPC/E,\cite{Clancy94} and experiment.\cite{CRC80} The window shows a
705   expansion around 300 K with error bars included to clarify this region
706   of interest. Note that both SSD1 and SSD/E show good agreement with
707   experiment when the long-range correction is neglected.}
708   \label{ssdedense}
709 + \end{center}
710   \end{figure}
711  
712   Figure \ref{ssdedense} shows the density profile for the SSD/E model
713 < in comparison to SSD1 without a reaction field, experiment, and other
714 < common water models. The calculated densities for both SSD/E and SSD1
715 < have increased significantly over the original SSD model (see figure
716 < \ref{dense1} and are in significantly better agreement with the
717 < experimental values. At 298 K, the density of SSD/E and SSD1 without a
718 < long-range correction are 0.996$\pm$0.001 g/cm$^3$ and 0.999$\pm$0.001
719 < g/cm$^3$ respectively.  These both compare well with the experimental
720 < value of 0.997 g/cm$^3$, and they are considerably better than the SSD
721 < value of 0.967$\pm$0.003 g/cm$^3$. The changes to the dipole moment
722 < and sticky switching functions have improved the structuring of the
723 < liquid (as seen in figure \ref{grcompare}, but they have shifted the
724 < density maximum to much lower temperatures. This comes about via an
725 < increase of the liquid disorder through the weakening of the sticky
726 < potential and strengthening of the dipolar character. However, this
727 < increasing disorder in the SSD/E model has little affect on the
728 < melting transition. By monitoring C$\text{p}$ throughout these
729 < simulations, the melting transition for SSD/E occurred at 235 K, the
730 < same transition temperature observed with SSD and SSD1.
713 > in comparison to SSD1 without a reaction field, other common water
714 > models, and experimental results. The calculated densities for both
715 > SSD/E and SSD1 have increased significantly over the original SSD
716 > model (see figure \ref{dense1}) and are in better agreement with the
717 > experimental values. At 298 K, the densities of SSD/E and SSD1 without
718 > a long-range correction are 0.996$\pm$0.001 g/cm$^3$ and
719 > 0.999$\pm$0.001 g/cm$^3$ respectively.  These both compare well with
720 > the experimental value of 0.997 g/cm$^3$, and they are considerably
721 > better than the SSD value of 0.967$\pm$0.003 g/cm$^3$. The changes to
722 > the dipole moment and sticky switching functions have improved the
723 > structuring of the liquid (as seen in figure \ref{grcompare}, but they
724 > have shifted the density maximum to much lower temperatures. This
725 > comes about via an increase in the liquid disorder through the
726 > weakening of the sticky potential and strengthening of the dipolar
727 > character. However, this increasing disorder in the SSD/E model has
728 > little effect on the melting transition. By monitoring C$\text{p}$
729 > throughout these simulations, the melting transition for SSD/E was
730 > shown to occur at 235 K, the same transition temperature observed with
731 > SSD and SSD1.
732  
733 < \begin{figure}
734 < \includegraphics[width=62mm, angle=-90]{ssdrfDense.epsi}
733 > \begin{figure}
734 > \begin{center}
735 > \epsfxsize=6in
736 > \epsfbox{ssdrfDense.epsi}
737   \caption{Comparison of densities calculated with SSD/RF to SSD1 with a
738 < reaction field, TIP3P\cite{Jorgensen98b}, TIP5P\cite{Jorgensen00},
739 < SPC/E\cite{Clancy94}, and Experiment\cite{CRC80}. The inset shows the
738 > reaction field, TIP3P,\cite{Jorgensen98b} TIP5P,\cite{Jorgensen00}
739 > SPC/E,\cite{Clancy94} and experiment.\cite{CRC80} The inset shows the
740   necessity of reparameterization when utilizing a reaction field
741   long-ranged correction - SSD/RF provides significantly more accurate
742   densities than SSD1 when performing room temperature simulations.}
743   \label{ssdrfdense}
744 + \end{center}
745   \end{figure}
746  
747 < Including the reaction field long-range correction results in a more
748 < interesting comparison. A density profile including SSD/RF and SSD1
749 < with an active reaction field is shown in figure \ref{ssdrfdense}.  As
750 < observed in the simulations without a reaction field, the densities of
751 < SSD/RF and SSD1 show a dramatic increase over normal SSD (see figure
752 < \ref{dense1}). At 298 K, SSD/RF has a density of 0.997$\pm$0.001
753 < g/cm$^3$, right in line with experiment and considerably better than
754 < the SSD value of 0.941$\pm$0.001 g/cm$^3$ and the SSD1 value of
755 < 0.972$\pm$0.002 g/cm$^3$. These results further emphasize the
756 < importance of reparameterization in order to model the density
757 < properly under different simulation conditions. Again, these changes
758 < don't have that profound an effect on the melting point which is
759 < observed at 245 K for SSD/RF, identical to SSD and only 5 K lower than
760 < SSD1 with a reaction field. However, the difference in density maxima
761 < is not quite as extreme with SSD/RF showing a density maximum at 255
762 < K, fairly close to 260 and 265 K, the density maxima for SSD and SSD1
763 < respectively.
764 <
765 < \begin{figure}
766 < \includegraphics[width=65mm, angle=-90]{ssdeDiffuse.epsi}
767 < \caption{Plots of the diffusion constants calculated from SSD/E and SSD1,
768 < both without a reaction field, along with experimental results are
769 < from Gillen \emph{et al.}\cite{Gillen72} and Mills\cite{Mills73}. The
770 < NVE calculations were performed at the average densities observed in
771 < the 1 atm NPT simulations for the respective models. SSD/E is
772 < slightly more fluid than experiment at all of the temperatures, but
773 < it is closer than SSD1 without a long-range correction.}
747 > Including the reaction field long-range correction in the simulations
748 > results in a more interesting comparison. A density profile including
749 > SSD/RF and SSD1 with an active reaction field is shown in figure
750 > \ref{ssdrfdense}.  As observed in the simulations without a reaction
751 > field, the densities of SSD/RF and SSD1 show a dramatic increase over
752 > normal SSD (see figure \ref{dense1}). At 298 K, SSD/RF has a density
753 > of 0.997$\pm$0.001 g/cm$^3$, directly in line with experiment and
754 > considerably better than the SSD value of 0.941$\pm$0.001 g/cm$^3$ and
755 > the SSD1 value of 0.972$\pm$0.002 g/cm$^3$. These results further
756 > emphasize the importance of reparameterization in order to model the
757 > density properly under different simulation conditions. Again, these
758 > changes have only a minor effect on the melting point, which observed
759 > at 245 K for SSD/RF, is identical to SSD and only 5 K lower than SSD1
760 > with a reaction field. Additionally, the difference in density maxima
761 > is not as extreme, with SSD/RF showing a density maximum at 255 K,
762 > fairly close to the density maxima of 260 K and 265 K, shown by SSD
763 > and SSD1 respectively.
764 >
765 > \begin{figure}
766 > \begin{center}
767 > \epsfxsize=6in
768 > \epsfbox{ssdeDiffuse.epsi}
769 > \caption{Plots of the diffusion constants calculated from SSD/E and SSD1,
770 > both without a reaction field, along with experimental
771 > results.\cite{Gillen72,Mills73} The NVE calculations were performed
772 > at the average densities observed in the 1 atm NPT simulations for
773 > the respective models. SSD/E is slightly more fluid than experiment
774 > at all of the temperatures, but it is closer than SSD1 without a
775 > long-range correction.}
776   \label{ssdediffuse}
777 + \end{center}
778   \end{figure}
779  
780   The reparameterization of the SSD water model, both for use with and
# Line 766 | Line 785 | water. In the upper plot, the diffusion constant for S
785   dependence of the diffusion constant of SSD/E to SSD1 without an
786   active reaction field, both at the densities calculated at 1 atm and
787   at the experimentally calculated densities for super-cooled and liquid
788 < water. In the upper plot, the diffusion constant for SSD/E is
789 < consistently a little faster than experiment, while SSD1 remains
790 < slower than experiment until relatively high temperatures (greater
791 < than 330 K). Both models follow the shape of the experimental trend
792 < well below 300 K, but the trend leans toward diffusing too rapidly at
793 < higher temperatures, something that is especially apparent with
794 < SSD1. This accelerated increasing of diffusion is caused by the
795 < rapidly decreasing system density with increasing temperature. Though
796 < it is difficult to see in figure \ref{ssdedense}, the densities of SSD1
797 < decay more rapidly with temperature than do those of SSD/E, leading to
798 < more visible deviation from the experimental diffusion trend. Thus,
799 < the changes made to improve the liquid structure may have had an
800 < adverse affect on the density maximum, but they improve the transport
801 < behavior of the water model.
788 > water. The diffusion constant for SSD/E is consistently a little
789 > higher than experiment, while SSD1 remains lower than experiment until
790 > relatively high temperatures (greater than 330 K). Both models follow
791 > the shape of the experimental curve well below 300 K but tend to
792 > diffuse too rapidly at higher temperatures, something that is
793 > especially apparent with SSD1. This accelerated increasing of
794 > diffusion is caused by the rapidly decreasing system density with
795 > increasing temperature. Though it is difficult to see in figure
796 > \ref{ssdedense}, the densities of SSD1 decay more rapidly with
797 > temperature than do those of SSD/E, leading to more visible deviation
798 > from the experimental diffusion trend. Thus, the changes made to
799 > improve the liquid structure may have had an adverse affect on the
800 > density maximum, but they improve the transport behavior of SSD/E
801 > relative to SSD1.
802  
803 < \begin{figure}
804 < \includegraphics[width=65mm, angle=-90]{ssdrfDiffuse.epsi}
803 > \begin{figure}
804 > \begin{center}
805 > \epsfxsize=6in
806 > \epsfbox{ssdrfDiffuse.epsi}
807   \caption{Plots of the diffusion constants calculated from SSD/RF and SSD1,
808 < both with an active reaction field, along with experimental results
809 < from Gillen \emph{et al.}\cite{Gillen72} and Mills\cite{Mills73}. The
810 < NVE calculations were performed at the average densities observed in
811 < the 1 atm NPT simulations for both of the models. Note how accurately
812 < SSD/RF simulates the diffusion of water throughout this temperature
813 < range. The more rapidly increasing diffusion constants at high
814 < temperatures for both models is attributed to the significantly lower
815 < densities than observed in experiment.}
808 > both with an active reaction field, along with experimental
809 > results.\cite{Gillen72,Mills73} The NVE calculations were performed
810 > at the average densities observed in the 1 atm NPT simulations for
811 > both of the models. Note how accurately SSD/RF simulates the
812 > diffusion of water throughout this temperature range. The more
813 > rapidly increasing diffusion constants at high temperatures for both
814 > models is attributed to the significantly lower densities than
815 > observed in experiment.}
816   \label{ssdrfdiffuse}
817 + \end{center}
818   \end{figure}
819  
820   In figure \ref{ssdrfdiffuse}, the diffusion constants for SSD/RF are
821 < compared with SSD1 with an active reaction field. Note that SSD/RF
821 > compared to SSD1 with an active reaction field. Note that SSD/RF
822   tracks the experimental results incredibly well, identical within
823 < error throughout the temperature range shown and only showing a slight
823 > error throughout the temperature range shown and with only a slight
824   increasing trend at higher temperatures. SSD1 tends to diffuse more
825   slowly at low temperatures and deviates to diffuse too rapidly at
826 < temperatures greater than 330 K. As was stated in the SSD/E
827 < comparisons, this deviation away from the ideal trend is due to a
828 < rapid decrease in density at higher temperatures. SSD/RF doesn't
829 < suffer from this problem as much as SSD1, because the calculated
830 < densities are more true to experiment. These results again emphasize
831 < the importance of careful reparameterization when using an altered
826 > temperatures greater than 330 K. As stated in relation to SSD/E, this
827 > deviation away from the ideal trend is due to a rapid decrease in
828 > density at higher temperatures. SSD/RF does not suffer from this
829 > problem as much as SSD1, because the calculated densities are closer
830 > to the experimental value. These results again emphasize the
831 > importance of careful reparameterization when using an altered
832   long-range correction.
833  
834   \subsection{Additional Observations}
835  
836   \begin{figure}
837 < \includegraphics[width=85mm]{povIce.ps}
838 < \caption{A water lattice built from the crystal structure that SSD/E
839 < assumed when undergoing an extremely restricted temperature NPT
837 > \begin{center}
838 > \epsfxsize=6in
839 > \epsfbox{povIce.ps}
840 > \caption{A water lattice built from the crystal structure assumed by
841 > SSD/E when undergoing an extremely restricted temperature NPT
842   simulation. This form of ice is referred to as ice 0 to emphasize its
843   simulation origins. This image was taken of the (001) face of the
844   crystal.}
845   \label{weirdice}
846 + \end{center}
847   \end{figure}
848  
849   While performing restricted temperature melting sequences of SSD/E not
850 < discussed earlier in this paper, some interesting observations were
851 < made. After melting at 235 K, two of five systems underwent
852 < crystallization events near 245 K. As the heating process continued,
853 < the two systems remained crystalline until finally melting between 320
854 < and 330 K. The final configurations of these two melting sequences
855 < show an expanded zeolite-like crystal structure that does not
856 < correspond to any known form of ice. For convenience and to help
857 < distinguish it from the experimentally observed forms of ice, this
858 < crystal structure will henceforth be referred to as ice-zero (ice
859 < 0). The crystallinity was extensive enough that a near ideal crystal
860 < structure could be obtained. Figure \ref{weirdice} shows the repeating
861 < crystal structure of a typical crystal at 5 K. Each water molecule is
862 < hydrogen bonded to four others; however, the hydrogen bonds are flexed
863 < rather than perfectly straight. This results in a skewed tetrahedral
864 < geometry about the central molecule. Looking back at figure
865 < \ref{isosurface}, it is easy to see how these flexed hydrogen bonds
866 < are allowed in that the attractive regions are conical in shape, with
867 < the greatest attraction in the central region. Though not ideal, these
868 < flexed hydrogen bonds are favorable enough to stabilize an entire
869 < crystal generated around them. In fact, the imperfect ice 0 crystals
870 < were so stable that they melted at temperatures nearly 100 K greater
871 < than both ice I$_c$ and I$_h$.
850 > previously discussed, some interesting observations were made. After
851 > melting at 235 K, two of five systems underwent crystallization events
852 > near 245 K. As the heating process continued, the two systems remained
853 > crystalline until finally melting between 320 and 330 K. The final
854 > configurations of these two melting sequences show an expanded
855 > zeolite-like crystal structure that does not correspond to any known
856 > form of ice. For convenience, and to help distinguish it from the
857 > experimentally observed forms of ice, this crystal structure will
858 > henceforth be referred to as ice-zero (ice 0). The crystallinity was
859 > extensive enough that a near ideal crystal structure of ice 0 could be
860 > obtained. Figure \ref{weirdice} shows the repeating crystal structure
861 > of a typical crystal at 5 K. Each water molecule is hydrogen bonded to
862 > four others; however, the hydrogen bonds are flexed rather than
863 > perfectly straight. This results in a skewed tetrahedral geometry
864 > about the central molecule. Referring to figure \ref{isosurface},
865 > these flexed hydrogen bonds are allowed due to the conical shape of
866 > the attractive regions, with the greatest attraction along the direct
867 > hydrogen bond configuration. Though not ideal, these flexed hydrogen
868 > bonds are favorable enough to stabilize an entire crystal generated
869 > around them. In fact, the imperfect ice 0 crystals were so stable that
870 > they melted at temperatures nearly 100 K greater than both ice I$_c$
871 > and I$_h$.
872  
873   These initial simulations indicated that ice 0 is the preferred ice
874 < structure for at least SSD/E. To verify this, a comparison was made
875 < between near ideal crystals of ice $I_h$, ice $I_c$, and ice 0 at
876 < constant pressure with SSD/E, SSD/RF, and SSD1. Near ideal versions of
877 < the three types of crystals were cooled to 1 K, and the potential
878 < energies of each were compared using all three water models. With
879 < every water model, ice 0 turned out to have the lowest potential
880 < energy: 5\% lower than $I_h$ with SSD1, 6.5\% lower with SSD/E, and
881 < 7.5\% lower with SSD/RF.
874 > structure for at least the SSD/E model. To verify this, a comparison
875 > was made between near ideal crystals of ice $I_h$, ice $I_c$, and ice
876 > 0 at constant pressure with SSD/E, SSD/RF, and SSD1. Near ideal
877 > versions of the three types of crystals were cooled to 1 K, and the
878 > potential energies of each were compared using all three water
879 > models. With every water model, ice 0 turned out to have the lowest
880 > potential energy: 5\% lower than $I_h$ with SSD1, 6.5\% lower with
881 > SSD/E, and 7.5\% lower with SSD/RF.
882  
883   In addition to these low temperature comparisons, melting sequences
884   were performed with ice 0 as the initial configuration using SSD/E,
885   SSD/RF, and SSD1 both with and without a reaction field. The melting
886   transitions for both SSD/E and SSD1 without a reaction field occurred
887   at temperature in excess of 375 K. SSD/RF and SSD1 with a reaction
888 < field had more reasonable melting transitions, down near 325 K. These
889 < melting point observations emphasize how preferred this crystal
890 < structure is over the most common types of ice when using these single
888 > field showed more reasonable melting transitions near 325 K. These
889 > melting point observations emphasize the preference for this crystal
890 > structure over the most common types of ice when using these single
891   point water models.
892  
893   Recognizing that the above tests show ice 0 to be both the most stable
# Line 871 | Line 896 | minimizations were performed on all of these crystals
896   this crystal structure with charge based water models. As a quick
897   test, these 3 crystal types were converted from SSD type particles to
898   TIP3P waters and read into CHARMM.\cite{Karplus83} Identical energy
899 < minimizations were performed on all of these crystals to compare the
900 < system energies. Again, ice 0 was observed to have the lowest total
901 < system energy. The total energy of ice 0 was ~2\% lower than ice
902 < $I_h$, which was in turn ~3\% lower than ice $I_c$. From these initial
903 < results, we would not be surprised if results from the other common
904 < water models show ice 0 to be the lowest energy crystal structure. A
905 < continuation on work studying ice 0 with multi-point water models will
906 < be published in a coming article.
899 > minimizations were performed on the crystals to compare the system
900 > energies. Again, ice 0 was observed to have the lowest total system
901 > energy. The total energy of ice 0 was ~2\% lower than ice $I_h$, which
902 > was in turn ~3\% lower than ice $I_c$. Based on these initial studies,
903 > it would not be surprising if results from the other common water
904 > models show ice 0 to be the lowest energy crystal structure. A
905 > continuation of this work studying ice 0 with multi-point water models
906 > will be published in a coming article.
907  
908   \section{Conclusions}
909   The density maximum and temperature dependent transport for the SSD
# Line 888 | Line 913 | capture the transport properties of experimental very
913   density maximum near 260 K. In most cases, the calculated densities
914   were significantly lower than the densities calculated in simulations
915   of other water models. Analysis of particle diffusion showed SSD to
916 < capture the transport properties of experimental very well in both the
917 < normal and super-cooled liquid regimes. In order to correct the
916 > capture the transport properties of experimental water well in both
917 > the liquid and super-cooled liquid regimes. In order to correct the
918   density behavior, the original SSD model was reparameterized for use
919   both with and without a reaction field (SSD/RF and SSD/E), and
920   comparison simulations were performed with SSD1, the density corrected
921   version of SSD. Both models improve the liquid structure, density
922   values, and diffusive properties under their respective conditions,
923   indicating the necessity of reparameterization when altering the
924 < long-range correction specifics. When taking the appropriate
925 < considerations, these simple water models are excellent choices for
926 < representing explicit water in large scale simulations of biochemical
927 < systems.
924 > long-range correction specifics. When taking into account the
925 > appropriate considerations, these simple water models are excellent
926 > choices for representing explicit water in large scale simulations of
927 > biochemical systems.
928  
929   \section{Acknowledgments}
930   Support for this project was provided by the National Science
# Line 907 | Line 932 | DMR 00 79647.
932   the Notre Dame Bunch-of-Boxes (B.o.B) computer cluster under NSF grant
933   DMR 00 79647.
934  
910 \bibliographystyle{jcp}
935  
936 + \newpage
937 +
938 + \bibliographystyle{jcp}
939   \bibliography{nptSSD}
940  
941   %\pagebreak

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines