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

Comparing trunk/tengDissertation/Introduction.tex (file contents):
Revision 2702 by tim, Wed Apr 12 03:37:46 2006 UTC vs.
Revision 2705 by tim, Wed Apr 12 21:20:13 2006 UTC

# Line 635 | Line 635 | a \emph{symplectic} flow if it satisfies,
635   Let $\varphi$ be the flow of Hamiltonian vector field, $\varphi$ is
636   a \emph{symplectic} flow if it satisfies,
637   \begin{equation}
638 < '\varphi^T J '\varphi = J.
638 > {\varphi '}^T J \varphi ' = J.
639   \end{equation}
640   According to Liouville's theorem, the symplectic volume is invariant
641   under a Hamiltonian flow, which is the basis for classical
# Line 643 | Line 643 | symplectomorphism. As to the Poisson system,
643   field on a symplectic manifold can be shown to be a
644   symplectomorphism. As to the Poisson system,
645   \begin{equation}
646 < '\varphi ^T J '\varphi  = J \circ \varphi
646 > {\varphi '}^T J \varphi ' = J \circ \varphi
647   \end{equation}
648   is the property must be preserved by the integrator.
649  
# Line 661 | Line 661 | When designing any numerical methods, one should alway
661   In other words, the flow of this vector field is reversible if and
662   only if $ h \circ \varphi ^{ - 1}  = \varphi  \circ h $.
663  
664 < When designing any numerical methods, one should always try to
664 > A \emph{first integral}, or conserved quantity of a general
665 > differential function is a function $ G:R^{2d}  \to R^d $ which is
666 > constant for all solutions of the ODE $\frac{{dx}}{{dt}} = f(x)$ ,
667 > \[
668 > \frac{{dG(x(t))}}{{dt}} = 0.
669 > \]
670 > Using chain rule, one may obtain,
671 > \[
672 > \sum\limits_i {\frac{{dG}}{{dx_i }}} f_i (x) = f \bullet \nabla G,
673 > \]
674 > which is the condition for conserving \emph{first integral}. For a
675 > canonical Hamiltonian system, the time evolution of an arbitrary
676 > smooth function $G$ is given by,
677 > \begin{equation}
678 > \begin{array}{c}
679 > \frac{{dG(x(t))}}{{dt}} = [\nabla _x G(x(t))]^T \dot x(t) \\
680 >  = [\nabla _x G(x(t))]^T J\nabla _x H(x(t)). \\
681 > \end{array}
682 > \label{introEquation:firstIntegral1}
683 > \end{equation}
684 > Using poisson bracket notion, Equation
685 > \ref{introEquation:firstIntegral1} can be rewritten as
686 > \[
687 > \frac{d}{{dt}}G(x(t)) = \left\{ {G,H} \right\}(x(t)).
688 > \]
689 > Therefore, the sufficient condition for $G$ to be the \emph{first
690 > integral} of a Hamiltonian system is
691 > \[
692 > \left\{ {G,H} \right\} = 0.
693 > \]
694 > As well known, the Hamiltonian (or energy) H of a Hamiltonian system
695 > is a \emph{first integral}, which is due to the fact $\{ H,H\}  =
696 > 0$.
697 >
698 >
699 > When designing any numerical methods, one should always try to
700   preserve the structural properties of the original ODE and its flow.
701  
702   \subsection{\label{introSection:constructionSymplectic}Construction of Symplectic Methods}
# Line 685 | Line 720 | instability \cite{}. However, due to computational pen
720   ordinary implicit Runge-Kutta methods are not suitable for
721   Hamiltonian system. Recently, various high-order explicit
722   Runge--Kutta methods have been developed to overcome this
723 < instability \cite{}. However, due to computational penalty involved
724 < in implementing the Runge-Kutta methods, they do not attract too
725 < much attention from Molecular Dynamics community. Instead, splitting
726 < have been widely accepted since they exploit natural decompositions
727 < of the system\cite{Tuckerman92}.
723 > instability. However, due to computational penalty involved in
724 > implementing the Runge-Kutta methods, they do not attract too much
725 > attention from Molecular Dynamics community. Instead, splitting have
726 > been widely accepted since they exploit natural decompositions of
727 > the system\cite{Tuckerman92}.
728  
729   \subsubsection{\label{introSection:splittingMethod}Splitting Method}
730  
# Line 744 | Line 779 | symmetric property,
779   symmetric property,
780   \begin{equation}
781   \varphi _h^{ - 1} = \varphi _{ - h}.
782 < \lable{introEquation:timeReversible}
782 > \label{introEquation:timeReversible}
783   \end{equation}
784  
785   \subsubsection{\label{introSection:exampleSplittingMethod}Example of Splitting Method}
# Line 802 | Line 837 | q(\Delta t) = q(0) + \frac{{\Delta t}}{2}\left[ {\dot
837   \frac{{\Delta t}}{{2m}}\dot q(0)} \right], %
838   \label{introEquation:positionVerlet1} \\%
839   %
840 < q(\Delta t) = q(0) + \frac{{\Delta t}}{2}\left[ {\dot q(0) + \dot
840 > q(\Delta t) &= q(0) + \frac{{\Delta t}}{2}\left[ {\dot q(0) + \dot
841   q(\Delta t)} \right]. %
842   \label{introEquation:positionVerlet1}
843   \end{align}
# Line 828 | Line 863 | can obtain
863   \]
864   Applying Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula to Sprang splitting, we
865   can obtain
866 < \begin{eqnarray}
866 > \begin{eqnarray*}
867   \exp (h X/2)\exp (h Y)\exp (h X/2) & = & \exp (h X + h Y + h^2
868 < [X,Y]/4 + h^2 [Y,X]/4 \\ & & \mbox{} + h^2 [X,X]/8 + h^2 [Y,Y]/8 +
869 < h^3 [Y,[Y,X]]/12 - h^3 [X,[X,Y]]/24 +  \ldots )
870 < \end{eqnarray}
868 > [X,Y]/4 + h^2 [Y,X]/4 \\ & & \mbox{} + h^2 [X,X]/8 + h^2 [Y,Y]/8 \\
869 > & & \mbox{} + h^3 [Y,[Y,X]]/12 - h^3 [X,[X,Y]]/24 & & \mbox{} +
870 > \ldots )
871 > \end{eqnarray*}
872   Since \[ [X,Y] + [Y,X] = 0\] and \[ [X,X] = 0\], the dominant local
873   error of Spring splitting is proportional to $h^3$. The same
874   procedure can be applied to general splitting,  of the form
# Line 871 | Line 907 | dynamical information.
907  
908   \subsection{\label{introSec:mdInit}Initialization}
909  
910 + \subsection{\label{introSec:forceEvaluation}Force Evaluation}
911 +
912   \subsection{\label{introSection:mdIntegration} Integration of the Equations of Motion}
913  
914   \section{\label{introSection:rigidBody}Dynamics of Rigid Bodies}
915  
916 < A rigid body is a body in which the distance between any two given
917 < points of a rigid body remains constant regardless of external
918 < forces exerted on it. A rigid body therefore conserves its shape
919 < during its motion.
916 > Rigid bodies are frequently involved in the modeling of different
917 > areas, from engineering, physics, to chemistry. For example,
918 > missiles and vehicle are usually modeled by rigid bodies.  The
919 > movement of the objects in 3D gaming engine or other physics
920 > simulator is governed by the rigid body dynamics. In molecular
921 > simulation, rigid body is used to simplify the model in
922 > protein-protein docking study{\cite{Gray03}}.
923  
924 < Applications of dynamics of rigid bodies.
924 > It is very important to develop stable and efficient methods to
925 > integrate the equations of motion of orientational degrees of
926 > freedom. Euler angles are the nature choice to describe the
927 > rotational degrees of freedom. However, due to its singularity, the
928 > numerical integration of corresponding equations of motion is very
929 > inefficient and inaccurate. Although an alternative integrator using
930 > different sets of Euler angles can overcome this difficulty\cite{},
931 > the computational penalty and the lost of angular momentum
932 > conservation still remain. A singularity free representation
933 > utilizing quaternions was developed by Evans in 1977. Unfortunately,
934 > this approach suffer from the nonseparable Hamiltonian resulted from
935 > quaternion representation, which prevents the symplectic algorithm
936 > to be utilized. Another different approach is to apply holonomic
937 > constraints to the atoms belonging to the rigid body. Each atom
938 > moves independently under the normal forces deriving from potential
939 > energy and constraint forces which are used to guarantee the
940 > rigidness. However, due to their iterative nature, SHAKE and Rattle
941 > algorithm converge very slowly when the number of constraint
942 > increases.
943  
944 + The break through in geometric literature suggests that, in order to
945 + develop a long-term integration scheme, one should preserve the
946 + symplectic structure of the flow. Introducing conjugate momentum to
947 + rotation matrix $A$ and re-formulating Hamiltonian's equation, a
948 + symplectic integrator, RSHAKE, was proposed to evolve the
949 + Hamiltonian system in a constraint manifold by iteratively
950 + satisfying the orthogonality constraint $A_t A = 1$. An alternative
951 + method using quaternion representation was developed by Omelyan.
952 + However, both of these methods are iterative and inefficient. In
953 + this section, we will present a symplectic Lie-Poisson integrator
954 + for rigid body developed by Dullweber and his coworkers\cite{}.
955 +
956   \subsection{\label{introSection:lieAlgebra}Lie Algebra}
957  
958   \subsection{\label{introSection:DLMMotionEquation}The Euler Equations of Rigid Body Motion}

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines