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 2706 by tim, Thu Apr 13 04:47:47 2006 UTC vs.
Revision 2944 by tim, Tue Jul 18 05:47:33 2006 UTC

# Line 3 | Line 3 | Closely related to Classical Mechanics, Molecular Dyna
3   \section{\label{introSection:classicalMechanics}Classical
4   Mechanics}
5  
6 < Closely related to Classical Mechanics, Molecular Dynamics
7 < simulations are carried out by integrating the equations of motion
8 < for a given system of particles. There are three fundamental ideas
9 < behind classical mechanics. Firstly, One can determine the state of
10 < a mechanical system at any time of interest; Secondly, all the
11 < mechanical properties of the system at that time can be determined
12 < by combining the knowledge of the properties of the system with the
13 < specification of this state; Finally, the specification of the state
14 < when further combine with the laws of mechanics will also be
15 < sufficient to predict the future behavior of the system.
6 > Using equations of motion derived from Classical Mechanics,
7 > Molecular Dynamics simulations are carried out by integrating the
8 > equations of motion for a given system of particles. There are three
9 > fundamental ideas behind classical mechanics. Firstly, one can
10 > determine the state of a mechanical system at any time of interest;
11 > Secondly, all the mechanical properties of the system at that time
12 > can be determined by combining the knowledge of the properties of
13 > the system with the specification of this state; Finally, the
14 > specification of the state when further combined with the laws of
15 > mechanics will also be sufficient to predict the future behavior of
16 > the system.
17  
18   \subsection{\label{introSection:newtonian}Newtonian Mechanics}
19   The discovery of Newton's three laws of mechanics which govern the
20   motion of particles is the foundation of the classical mechanics.
21 < Newton¡¯s first law defines a class of inertial frames. Inertial
21 > Newton's first law defines a class of inertial frames. Inertial
22   frames are reference frames where a particle not interacting with
23   other bodies will move with constant speed in the same direction.
24 < With respect to inertial frames Newton¡¯s second law has the form
24 > With respect to inertial frames, Newton's second law has the form
25   \begin{equation}
26 < F = \frac {dp}{dt} = \frac {mv}{dt}
26 > F = \frac {dp}{dt} = \frac {mdv}{dt}
27   \label{introEquation:newtonSecondLaw}
28   \end{equation}
29   A point mass interacting with other bodies moves with the
30   acceleration along the direction of the force acting on it. Let
31   $F_{ij}$ be the force that particle $i$ exerts on particle $j$, and
32   $F_{ji}$ be the force that particle $j$ exerts on particle $i$.
33 < Newton¡¯s third law states that
33 > Newton's third law states that
34   \begin{equation}
35 < F_{ij} = -F_{ji}
35 > F_{ij} = -F_{ji}.
36   \label{introEquation:newtonThirdLaw}
37   \end{equation}
37
38   Conservation laws of Newtonian Mechanics play very important roles
39   in solving mechanics problems. The linear momentum of a particle is
40   conserved if it is free or it experiences no force. The second
# Line 46 | Line 46 | N \equiv r \times F \label{introEquation:torqueDefinit
46   \end{equation}
47   The torque $\tau$ with respect to the same origin is defined to be
48   \begin{equation}
49 < N \equiv r \times F \label{introEquation:torqueDefinition}
49 > \tau \equiv r \times F \label{introEquation:torqueDefinition}
50   \end{equation}
51   Differentiating Eq.~\ref{introEquation:angularMomentumDefinition},
52   \[
# Line 59 | Line 59 | thus,
59   \]
60   thus,
61   \begin{equation}
62 < \dot L = r \times \dot p = N
62 > \dot L = r \times \dot p = \tau
63   \end{equation}
64   If there are no external torques acting on a body, the angular
65   momentum of it is conserved. The last conservation theorem state
66 < that if all forces are conservative, Energy
67 < \begin{equation}E = T + V \label{introEquation:energyConservation}
66 > that if all forces are conservative, energy is conserved,
67 > \begin{equation}E = T + V. \label{introEquation:energyConservation}
68   \end{equation}
69 < is conserved. All of these conserved quantities are
70 < important factors to determine the quality of numerical integration
71 < scheme for rigid body \cite{Dullweber1997}.
69 > All of these conserved quantities are important factors to determine
70 > the quality of numerical integration schemes for rigid
71 > bodies.\cite{Dullweber1997}
72  
73   \subsection{\label{introSection:lagrangian}Lagrangian Mechanics}
74  
75 < Newtonian Mechanics suffers from two important limitations: it
76 < describes their motion in special cartesian coordinate systems.
77 < Another limitation of Newtonian mechanics becomes obvious when we
78 < try to describe systems with large numbers of particles. It becomes
79 < very difficult to predict the properties of the system by carrying
80 < out calculations involving the each individual interaction between
81 < all the particles, even if we know all of the details of the
82 < interaction. In order to overcome some of the practical difficulties
83 < which arise in attempts to apply Newton's equation to complex
84 < system, alternative procedures may be developed.
75 > Newtonian Mechanics suffers from an important limitation: motion can
76 > only be described in cartesian coordinate systems which make it
77 > impossible to predict analytically the properties of the system even
78 > if we know all of the details of the interaction. In order to
79 > overcome some of the practical difficulties which arise in attempts
80 > to apply Newton's equation to complex systems, approximate numerical
81 > procedures may be developed.
82  
83 < \subsubsection{\label{introSection:halmiltonPrinciple}Hamilton's
84 < Principle}
83 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:halmiltonPrinciple}\textbf{Hamilton's
84 > Principle}}
85  
86   Hamilton introduced the dynamical principle upon which it is
87 < possible to base all of mechanics and, indeed, most of classical
88 < physics. Hamilton's Principle may be stated as follow,
89 <
90 < The actual trajectory, along which a dynamical system may move from
91 < one point to another within a specified time, is derived by finding
92 < the path which minimizes the time integral of the difference between
96 < the kinetic, $K$, and potential energies, $U$ \cite{tolman79}.
87 > possible to base all of mechanics and most of classical physics.
88 > Hamilton's Principle may be stated as follows: the trajectory, along
89 > which a dynamical system may move from one point to another within a
90 > specified time, is derived by finding the path which minimizes the
91 > time integral of the difference between the kinetic $K$, and
92 > potential energies $U$,
93   \begin{equation}
94 < \delta \int_{t_1 }^{t_2 } {(K - U)dt = 0} ,
94 > \delta \int_{t_1 }^{t_2 } {(K - U)dt = 0}.
95   \label{introEquation:halmitonianPrinciple1}
96   \end{equation}
101
97   For simple mechanical systems, where the forces acting on the
98 < different part are derivable from a potential and the velocities are
99 < small compared with that of light, the Lagrangian function $L$ can
100 < be define as the difference between the kinetic energy of the system
106 < and its potential energy,
98 > different parts are derivable from a potential, the Lagrangian
99 > function $L$ can be defined as the difference between the kinetic
100 > energy of the system and its potential energy,
101   \begin{equation}
102 < L \equiv K - U = L(q_i ,\dot q_i ) ,
102 > L \equiv K - U = L(q_i ,\dot q_i ).
103   \label{introEquation:lagrangianDef}
104   \end{equation}
105 < then Eq.~\ref{introEquation:halmitonianPrinciple1} becomes
105 > Thus, Eq.~\ref{introEquation:halmitonianPrinciple1} becomes
106   \begin{equation}
107 < \delta \int_{t_1 }^{t_2 } {L dt = 0} ,
107 > \delta \int_{t_1 }^{t_2 } {L dt = 0} .
108   \label{introEquation:halmitonianPrinciple2}
109   \end{equation}
110  
111 < \subsubsection{\label{introSection:equationOfMotionLagrangian}The
112 < Equations of Motion in Lagrangian Mechanics}
111 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:equationOfMotionLagrangian}\textbf{The
112 > Equations of Motion in Lagrangian Mechanics}}
113  
114 < For a holonomic system of $f$ degrees of freedom, the equations of
115 < motion in the Lagrangian form is
114 > For a system of $f$ degrees of freedom, the equations of motion in
115 > the Lagrangian form is
116   \begin{equation}
117   \frac{d}{{dt}}\frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial \dot q_i }} -
118   \frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial q_i }} = 0,{\rm{ }}i = 1, \ldots,f
# Line 132 | Line 126 | independent of generalized velocities, the generalized
126   Arising from Lagrangian Mechanics, Hamiltonian Mechanics was
127   introduced by William Rowan Hamilton in 1833 as a re-formulation of
128   classical mechanics. If the potential energy of a system is
129 < independent of generalized velocities, the generalized momenta can
136 < be defined as
129 > independent of velocities, the momenta can be defined as
130   \begin{equation}
131   p_i = \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot q_i}
132   \label{introEquation:generalizedMomenta}
# Line 143 | Line 136 | p_i  = \frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial q_i }}
136   p_i  = \frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial q_i }}
137   \label{introEquation:generalizedMomentaDot}
138   \end{equation}
146
139   With the help of the generalized momenta, we may now define a new
140   quantity $H$ by the equation
141   \begin{equation}
# Line 151 | Line 143 | $L$ is the Lagrangian function for the system.
143   \label{introEquation:hamiltonianDefByLagrangian}
144   \end{equation}
145   where $ \dot q_1  \ldots \dot q_f $ are generalized velocities and
146 < $L$ is the Lagrangian function for the system.
147 <
156 < Differentiating Eq.~\ref{introEquation:hamiltonianDefByLagrangian},
157 < one can obtain
146 > $L$ is the Lagrangian function for the system. Differentiating
147 > Eq.~\ref{introEquation:hamiltonianDefByLagrangian}, one can obtain
148   \begin{equation}
149   dH = \sum\limits_k {\left( {p_k d\dot q_k  + \dot q_k dp_k  -
150   \frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial q_k }}dq_k  - \frac{{\partial
151   L}}{{\partial \dot q_k }}d\dot q_k } \right)}  - \frac{{\partial
152 < L}}{{\partial t}}dt \label{introEquation:diffHamiltonian1}
152 > L}}{{\partial t}}dt . \label{introEquation:diffHamiltonian1}
153   \end{equation}
154 < Making use of  Eq.~\ref{introEquation:generalizedMomenta}, the
155 < second and fourth terms in the parentheses cancel. Therefore,
154 > Making use of Eq.~\ref{introEquation:generalizedMomenta}, the second
155 > and fourth terms in the parentheses cancel. Therefore,
156   Eq.~\ref{introEquation:diffHamiltonian1} can be rewritten as
157   \begin{equation}
158   dH = \sum\limits_k {\left( {\dot q_k dp_k  - \dot p_k dq_k }
159 < \right)}  - \frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial t}}dt
159 > \right)}  - \frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial t}}dt .
160   \label{introEquation:diffHamiltonian2}
161   \end{equation}
162   By identifying the coefficients of $dq_k$, $dp_k$ and dt, we can
163   find
164   \begin{equation}
165 < \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial p_k }} = q_k
165 > \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial p_k }} = \dot {q_k}
166   \label{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate}
167   \end{equation}
168   \begin{equation}
169 < \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial q_k }} =  - p_k
169 > \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial q_k }} =  - \dot {p_k}
170   \label{introEquation:motionHamiltonianMomentum}
171   \end{equation}
172   and
# Line 185 | Line 175 | t}}
175   t}}
176   \label{introEquation:motionHamiltonianTime}
177   \end{equation}
178 <
189 < Eq.~\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate} and
178 > where Eq.~\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate} and
179   Eq.~\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianMomentum} are Hamilton's
180   equation of motion. Due to their symmetrical formula, they are also
181 < known as the canonical equations of motions \cite{Goldstein01}.
181 > known as the canonical equations of motions.\cite{Goldstein2001}
182  
183   An important difference between Lagrangian approach and the
184   Hamiltonian approach is that the Lagrangian is considered to be a
185 < function of the generalized velocities $\dot q_i$ and the
186 < generalized coordinates $q_i$, while the Hamiltonian is considered
187 < to be a function of the generalized momenta $p_i$ and the conjugate
188 < generalized coordinate $q_i$. Hamiltonian Mechanics is more
189 < appropriate for application to statistical mechanics and quantum
190 < mechanics, since it treats the coordinate and its time derivative as
191 < independent variables and it only works with 1st-order differential
203 < equations\cite{Marion90}.
204 <
185 > function of the generalized velocities $\dot q_i$ and coordinates
186 > $q_i$, while the Hamiltonian is considered to be a function of the
187 > generalized momenta $p_i$ and the conjugate coordinates $q_i$.
188 > Hamiltonian Mechanics is more appropriate for application to
189 > statistical mechanics and quantum mechanics, since it treats the
190 > coordinate and its time derivative as independent variables and it
191 > only works with 1st-order differential equations.\cite{Marion1990}
192   In Newtonian Mechanics, a system described by conservative forces
193 < conserves the total energy \ref{introEquation:energyConservation}.
194 < It follows that Hamilton's equations of motion conserve the total
195 < Hamiltonian.
193 > conserves the total energy
194 > (Eq.~\ref{introEquation:energyConservation}). It follows that
195 > Hamilton's equations of motion conserve the total Hamiltonian
196   \begin{equation}
197   \frac{{dH}}{{dt}} = \sum\limits_i {\left( {\frac{{\partial
198   H}}{{\partial q_i }}\dot q_i  + \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial p_i
199   }}\dot p_i } \right)}  = \sum\limits_i {\left( {\frac{{\partial
200   H}}{{\partial q_i }}\frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial p_i }} -
201   \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial p_i }}\frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial
202 < q_i }}} \right) = 0} \label{introEquation:conserveHalmitonian}
202 > q_i }}} \right) = 0}. \label{introEquation:conserveHalmitonian}
203   \end{equation}
204  
205   \section{\label{introSection:statisticalMechanics}Statistical
# Line 221 | Line 208 | Statistical Mechanics concepts and theorem presented i
208   The thermodynamic behaviors and properties of Molecular Dynamics
209   simulation are governed by the principle of Statistical Mechanics.
210   The following section will give a brief introduction to some of the
211 < Statistical Mechanics concepts and theorem presented in this
211 > Statistical Mechanics concepts and theorems presented in this
212   dissertation.
213  
214   \subsection{\label{introSection:ensemble}Phase Space and Ensemble}
215  
216   Mathematically, phase space is the space which represents all
217 < possible states. Each possible state of the system corresponds to
218 < one unique point in the phase space. For mechanical systems, the
219 < phase space usually consists of all possible values of position and
220 < momentum variables. Consider a dynamic system in a cartesian space,
221 < where each of the $6f$ coordinates and momenta is assigned to one of
222 < $6f$ mutually orthogonal axes, the phase space of this system is a
223 < $6f$ dimensional space. A point, $x = (q_1 , \ldots ,q_f ,p_1 ,
224 < \ldots ,p_f )$, with a unique set of values of $6f$ coordinates and
217 > possible states of a system. Each possible state of the system
218 > corresponds to one unique point in the phase space. For mechanical
219 > systems, the phase space usually consists of all possible values of
220 > position and momentum variables. Consider a dynamic system of $f$
221 > particles in a cartesian space, where each of the $6f$ coordinates
222 > and momenta is assigned to one of $6f$ mutually orthogonal axes, the
223 > phase space of this system is a $6f$ dimensional space. A point, $x
224 > =
225 > (\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
226 > \over q} _1 , \ldots
227 > ,\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
228 > \over q} _f
229 > ,\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
230 > \over p} _1  \ldots
231 > ,\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
232 > \over p} _f )$ , with a unique set of values of $6f$ coordinates and
233   momenta is a phase space vector.
234 + %%%fix me
235  
236 < A microscopic state or microstate of a classical system is
241 < specification of the complete phase space vector of a system at any
242 < instant in time. An ensemble is defined as a collection of systems
243 < sharing one or more macroscopic characteristics but each being in a
244 < unique microstate. The complete ensemble is specified by giving all
245 < systems or microstates consistent with the common macroscopic
246 < characteristics of the ensemble. Although the state of each
247 < individual system in the ensemble could be precisely described at
248 < any instance in time by a suitable phase space vector, when using
249 < ensembles for statistical purposes, there is no need to maintain
250 < distinctions between individual systems, since the numbers of
251 < systems at any time in the different states which correspond to
252 < different regions of the phase space are more interesting. Moreover,
253 < in the point of view of statistical mechanics, one would prefer to
254 < use ensembles containing a large enough population of separate
255 < members so that the numbers of systems in such different states can
256 < be regarded as changing continuously as we traverse different
257 < regions of the phase space. The condition of an ensemble at any time
236 > In statistical mechanics, the condition of an ensemble at any time
237   can be regarded as appropriately specified by the density $\rho$
238   with which representative points are distributed over the phase
239 < space. The density of distribution for an ensemble with $f$ degrees
240 < of freedom is defined as,
239 > space. The density distribution for an ensemble with $f$ degrees of
240 > freedom is defined as,
241   \begin{equation}
242   \rho  = \rho (q_1 , \ldots ,q_f ,p_1 , \ldots ,p_f ,t).
243   \label{introEquation:densityDistribution}
244   \end{equation}
245   Governed by the principles of mechanics, the phase points change
246 < their value which would change the density at any time at phase
247 < space. Hence, the density of distribution is also to be taken as a
248 < function of the time.
249 <
271 < The number of systems $\delta N$ at time $t$ can be determined by,
246 > their locations which changes the density at any time at phase
247 > space. Hence, the density distribution is also to be taken as a
248 > function of the time. The number of systems $\delta N$ at time $t$
249 > can be determined by,
250   \begin{equation}
251   \delta N = \rho (q,p,t)dq_1  \ldots dq_f dp_1  \ldots dp_f.
252   \label{introEquation:deltaN}
253   \end{equation}
254 < Assuming a large enough population of systems are exploited, we can
255 < sufficiently approximate $\delta N$ without introducing
256 < discontinuity when we go from one region in the phase space to
257 < another. By integrating over the whole phase space,
254 > Assuming enough copies of the systems, we can sufficiently
255 > approximate $\delta N$ without introducing discontinuity when we go
256 > from one region in the phase space to another. By integrating over
257 > the whole phase space,
258   \begin{equation}
259   N = \int { \ldots \int {\rho (q,p,t)dq_1 } ...dq_f dp_1 } ...dp_f
260   \label{introEquation:totalNumberSystem}
261   \end{equation}
262 < gives us an expression for the total number of the systems. Hence,
263 < the probability per unit in the phase space can be obtained by,
262 > gives us an expression for the total number of copies. Hence, the
263 > probability per unit volume in the phase space can be obtained by,
264   \begin{equation}
265   \frac{{\rho (q,p,t)}}{N} = \frac{{\rho (q,p,t)}}{{\int { \ldots \int
266   {\rho (q,p,t)dq_1 } ...dq_f dp_1 } ...dp_f }}.
267   \label{introEquation:unitProbability}
268   \end{equation}
269 < With the help of Equation(\ref{introEquation:unitProbability}) and
270 < the knowledge of the system, it is possible to calculate the average
269 > With the help of Eq.~\ref{introEquation:unitProbability} and the
270 > knowledge of the system, it is possible to calculate the average
271   value of any desired quantity which depends on the coordinates and
272 < momenta of the system. Even when the dynamics of the real system is
272 > momenta of the system. Even when the dynamics of the real system are
273   complex, or stochastic, or even discontinuous, the average
274 < properties of the ensemble of possibilities as a whole may still
275 < remain well defined. For a classical system in thermal equilibrium
276 < with its environment, the ensemble average of a mechanical quantity,
277 < $\langle A(q , p) \rangle_t$, takes the form of an integral over the
278 < phase space of the system,
274 > properties of the ensemble of possibilities as a whole remain well
275 > defined. For a classical system in thermal equilibrium with its
276 > environment, the ensemble average of a mechanical quantity, $\langle
277 > A(q , p) \rangle_t$, takes the form of an integral over the phase
278 > space of the system,
279   \begin{equation}
280   \langle  A(q , p) \rangle_t = \frac{{\int { \ldots \int {A(q,p)\rho
281   (q,p,t)dq_1 } ...dq_f dp_1 } ...dp_f }}{{\int { \ldots \int {\rho
282 < (q,p,t)dq_1 } ...dq_f dp_1 } ...dp_f }}
282 > (q,p,t)dq_1 } ...dq_f dp_1 } ...dp_f }}.
283   \label{introEquation:ensembelAverage}
284   \end{equation}
285  
308 There are several different types of ensembles with different
309 statistical characteristics. As a function of macroscopic
310 parameters, such as temperature \textit{etc}, partition function can
311 be used to describe the statistical properties of a system in
312 thermodynamic equilibrium.
313
314 As an ensemble of systems, each of which is known to be thermally
315 isolated and conserve energy, Microcanonical ensemble(NVE) has a
316 partition function like,
317 \begin{equation}
318 \Omega (N,V,E) = e^{\beta TS} \label{introEquation:NVEPartition}.
319 \end{equation}
320 A canonical ensemble(NVT)is an ensemble of systems, each of which
321 can share its energy with a large heat reservoir. The distribution
322 of the total energy amongst the possible dynamical states is given
323 by the partition function,
324 \begin{equation}
325 \Omega (N,V,T) = e^{ - \beta A}
326 \label{introEquation:NVTPartition}
327 \end{equation}
328 Here, $A$ is the Helmholtz free energy which is defined as $ A = U -
329 TS$. Since most experiment are carried out under constant pressure
330 condition, isothermal-isobaric ensemble(NPT) play a very important
331 role in molecular simulation. The isothermal-isobaric ensemble allow
332 the system to exchange energy with a heat bath of temperature $T$
333 and to change the volume as well. Its partition function is given as
334 \begin{equation}
335 \Delta (N,P,T) =  - e^{\beta G}.
336 \label{introEquation:NPTPartition}
337 \end{equation}
338 Here, $G = U - TS + PV$, and $G$ is called Gibbs free energy.
339
286   \subsection{\label{introSection:liouville}Liouville's theorem}
287  
288 < The Liouville's theorem is the foundation on which statistical
289 < mechanics rests. It describes the time evolution of phase space
288 > Liouville's theorem is the foundation on which statistical mechanics
289 > rests. It describes the time evolution of the phase space
290   distribution function. In order to calculate the rate of change of
291 < $\rho$, we begin from Equation(\ref{introEquation:deltaN}). If we
292 < consider the two faces perpendicular to the $q_1$ axis, which are
293 < located at $q_1$ and $q_1 + \delta q_1$, the number of phase points
294 < leaving the opposite face is given by the expression,
291 > $\rho$, we begin from Eq.~\ref{introEquation:deltaN}. If we consider
292 > the two faces perpendicular to the $q_1$ axis, which are located at
293 > $q_1$ and $q_1 + \delta q_1$, the number of phase points leaving the
294 > opposite face is given by the expression,
295   \begin{equation}
296   \left( {\rho  + \frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial q_1 }}\delta q_1 }
297   \right)\left( {\dot q_1  + \frac{{\partial \dot q_1 }}{{\partial q_1
# Line 369 | Line 315 | divining $ \delta q_1  \ldots \delta q_f \delta p_1  \
315   + \frac{{\partial \dot p_i }}{{\partial p_i }}} \right)}  = 0 ,
316   \end{equation}
317   which cancels the first terms of the right hand side. Furthermore,
318 < divining $ \delta q_1  \ldots \delta q_f \delta p_1  \ldots \delta
318 > dividing $ \delta q_1  \ldots \delta q_f \delta p_1  \ldots \delta
319   p_f $ in both sides, we can write out Liouville's theorem in a
320   simple form,
321   \begin{equation}
# Line 378 | Line 324 | simple form,
324   \frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial p_i }}\dot p_i } \right)}  = 0 .
325   \label{introEquation:liouvilleTheorem}
326   \end{equation}
381
327   Liouville's theorem states that the distribution function is
328   constant along any trajectory in phase space. In classical
329 < statistical mechanics, since the number of particles in the system
330 < is huge, we may be able to believe the system is stationary,
329 > statistical mechanics, since the number of system copies in an
330 > ensemble is huge and constant, we can assume the local density has
331 > no reason (other than classical mechanics) to change,
332   \begin{equation}
333   \frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial t}} = 0.
334   \label{introEquation:stationary}
# Line 395 | Line 341 | distribution,
341   \label{introEquation:densityAndHamiltonian}
342   \end{equation}
343  
344 < \subsubsection{\label{introSection:phaseSpaceConservation}Conservation of Phase Space}
344 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:phaseSpaceConservation}\textbf{Conservation of Phase Space}}
345   Lets consider a region in the phase space,
346   \begin{equation}
347   \delta v = \int { \ldots \int {dq_1 } ...dq_f dp_1 } ..dp_f .
348   \end{equation}
349   If this region is small enough, the density $\rho$ can be regarded
350 < as uniform over the whole phase space. Thus, the number of phase
351 < points inside this region is given by,
350 > as uniform over the whole integral. Thus, the number of phase points
351 > inside this region is given by,
352   \begin{equation}
353   \delta N = \rho \delta v = \rho \int { \ldots \int {dq_1 } ...dq_f
354   dp_1 } ..dp_f.
# Line 412 | Line 358 | With the help of stationary assumption
358   \frac{{d(\delta N)}}{{dt}} = \frac{{d\rho }}{{dt}}\delta v + \rho
359   \frac{d}{{dt}}(\delta v) = 0.
360   \end{equation}
361 < With the help of stationary assumption
362 < (\ref{introEquation:stationary}), we obtain the principle of the
363 < \emph{conservation of extension in phase space},
361 > With the help of the stationary assumption
362 > (Eq.~\ref{introEquation:stationary}), we obtain the principle of
363 > \emph{conservation of volume in phase space},
364   \begin{equation}
365   \frac{d}{{dt}}(\delta v) = \frac{d}{{dt}}\int { \ldots \int {dq_1 }
366   ...dq_f dp_1 } ..dp_f  = 0.
367   \label{introEquation:volumePreserving}
368   \end{equation}
369  
370 < \subsubsection{\label{introSection:liouvilleInOtherForms}Liouville's Theorem in Other Forms}
370 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:liouvilleInOtherForms}\textbf{Liouville's Theorem in Other Forms}}
371  
372 < Liouville's theorem can be expresses in a variety of different forms
372 > Liouville's theorem can be expressed in a variety of different forms
373   which are convenient within different contexts. For any two function
374   $F$ and $G$ of the coordinates and momenta of a system, the Poisson
375 < bracket ${F, G}$ is defined as
375 > bracket $\{F,G\}$ is defined as
376   \begin{equation}
377   \left\{ {F,G} \right\} = \sum\limits_i {\left( {\frac{{\partial
378   F}}{{\partial q_i }}\frac{{\partial G}}{{\partial p_i }} -
# Line 434 | Line 380 | Substituting equations of motion in Hamiltonian formal
380   q_i }}} \right)}.
381   \label{introEquation:poissonBracket}
382   \end{equation}
383 < Substituting equations of motion in Hamiltonian formalism(
384 < \ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate} ,
385 < \ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianMomentum} ) into
386 < (\ref{introEquation:liouvilleTheorem}), we can rewrite Liouville's
387 < theorem using Poisson bracket notion,
383 > Substituting equations of motion in Hamiltonian formalism
384 > (Eq.~\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate} ,
385 > Eq.~\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianMomentum}) into
386 > (Eq.~\ref{introEquation:liouvilleTheorem}), we can rewrite
387 > Liouville's theorem using Poisson bracket notion,
388   \begin{equation}
389   \left( {\frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial t}}} \right) =  - \left\{
390   {\rho ,H} \right\}.
# Line 457 | Line 403 | expressed as
403   \left( {\frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial t}}} \right) =  - iL\rho
404   \label{introEquation:liouvilleTheoremInOperator}
405   \end{equation}
406 <
406 > which can help define a propagator $\rho (t) = e^{-iLt} \rho (0)$.
407   \subsection{\label{introSection:ergodic}The Ergodic Hypothesis}
408  
409   Various thermodynamic properties can be calculated from Molecular
410   Dynamics simulation. By comparing experimental values with the
411   calculated properties, one can determine the accuracy of the
412 < simulation and the quality of the underlying model. However, both of
413 < experiment and computer simulation are usually performed during a
412 > simulation and the quality of the underlying model. However, both
413 > experiments and computer simulations are usually performed during a
414   certain time interval and the measurements are averaged over a
415 < period of them which is different from the average behavior of
416 < many-body system in Statistical Mechanics. Fortunately, Ergodic
417 < Hypothesis is proposed to make a connection between time average and
418 < ensemble average. It states that time average and average over the
419 < statistical ensemble are identical \cite{Frenkel1996, leach01:mm}.
415 > period of time which is different from the average behavior of
416 > many-body system in Statistical Mechanics. Fortunately, the Ergodic
417 > Hypothesis makes a connection between time average and the ensemble
418 > average. It states that the time average and average over the
419 > statistical ensemble are identical:\cite{Frenkel1996, Leach2001}
420   \begin{equation}
421   \langle A(q , p) \rangle_t = \mathop {\lim }\limits_{t \to \infty }
422   \frac{1}{t}\int\limits_0^t {A(q(t),p(t))dt = \int\limits_\Gamma
# Line 479 | Line 425 | sufficiently long time (longer than relaxation time),
425   where $\langle  A(q , p) \rangle_t$ is an equilibrium value of a
426   physical quantity and $\rho (p(t), q(t))$ is the equilibrium
427   distribution function. If an observation is averaged over a
428 < sufficiently long time (longer than relaxation time), all accessible
429 < microstates in phase space are assumed to be equally probed, giving
430 < a properly weighted statistical average. This allows the researcher
431 < freedom of choice when deciding how best to measure a given
432 < observable. In case an ensemble averaged approach sounds most
433 < reasonable, the Monte Carlo techniques\cite{metropolis:1949} can be
428 > sufficiently long time (longer than the relaxation time), all
429 > accessible microstates in phase space are assumed to be equally
430 > probed, giving a properly weighted statistical average. This allows
431 > the researcher freedom of choice when deciding how best to measure a
432 > given observable. In case an ensemble averaged approach sounds most
433 > reasonable, the Monte Carlo methods\cite{Metropolis1949} can be
434   utilized. Or if the system lends itself to a time averaging
435   approach, the Molecular Dynamics techniques in
436   Sec.~\ref{introSection:molecularDynamics} will be the best
437 < choice\cite{Frenkel1996}.
437 > choice.\cite{Frenkel1996}
438  
439   \section{\label{introSection:geometricIntegratos}Geometric Integrators}
440 < A variety of numerical integrators were proposed to simulate the
441 < motions. They usually begin with an initial conditionals and move
442 < the objects in the direction governed by the differential equations.
443 < However, most of them ignore the hidden physical law contained
444 < within the equations. Since 1990, geometric integrators, which
445 < preserve various phase-flow invariants such as symplectic structure,
446 < volume and time reversal symmetry, are developed to address this
447 < issue. The velocity verlet method, which happens to be a simple
448 < example of symplectic integrator, continues to gain its popularity
449 < in molecular dynamics community. This fact can be partly explained
450 < by its geometric nature.
440 > A variety of numerical integrators have been proposed to simulate
441 > the motions of atoms in MD simulation. They usually begin with
442 > initial conditions and move the objects in the direction governed by
443 > the differential equations. However, most of them ignore the hidden
444 > physical laws contained within the equations. Since 1990, geometric
445 > integrators, which preserve various phase-flow invariants such as
446 > symplectic structure, volume and time reversal symmetry, were
447 > developed to address this issue.\cite{Dullweber1997, McLachlan1998,
448 > Leimkuhler1999} The velocity Verlet method, which happens to be a
449 > simple example of symplectic integrator, continues to gain
450 > popularity in the molecular dynamics community. This fact can be
451 > partly explained by its geometric nature.
452  
453 < \subsection{\label{introSection:symplecticManifold}Symplectic Manifold}
454 < A \emph{manifold} is an abstract mathematical space. It locally
455 < looks like Euclidean space, but when viewed globally, it may have
456 < more complicate structure. A good example of manifold is the surface
457 < of Earth. It seems to be flat locally, but it is round if viewed as
458 < a whole. A \emph{differentiable manifold} (also known as
459 < \emph{smooth manifold}) is a manifold with an open cover in which
460 < the covering neighborhoods are all smoothly isomorphic to one
461 < another. In other words,it is possible to apply calculus on
462 < \emph{differentiable manifold}. A \emph{symplectic manifold} is
516 < defined as a pair $(M, \omega)$ which consisting of a
517 < \emph{differentiable manifold} $M$ and a close, non-degenerated,
453 > \subsection{\label{introSection:symplecticManifold}Manifolds and Bundles}
454 > A \emph{manifold} is an abstract mathematical space. It looks
455 > locally like Euclidean space, but when viewed globally, it may have
456 > more complicated structure. A good example of manifold is the
457 > surface of Earth. It seems to be flat locally, but it is round if
458 > viewed as a whole. A \emph{differentiable manifold} (also known as
459 > \emph{smooth manifold}) is a manifold on which it is possible to
460 > apply calculus.\cite{Hirsch1997} A \emph{symplectic manifold} is
461 > defined as a pair $(M, \omega)$ which consists of a
462 > \emph{differentiable manifold} $M$ and a close, non-degenerate,
463   bilinear symplectic form, $\omega$. A symplectic form on a vector
464   space $V$ is a function $\omega(x, y)$ which satisfies
465   $\omega(\lambda_1x_1+\lambda_2x_2, y) = \lambda_1\omega(x_1, y)+
466   \lambda_2\omega(x_2, y)$, $\omega(x, y) = - \omega(y, x)$ and
467 < $\omega(x, x) = 0$. Cross product operation in vector field is an
468 < example of symplectic form.
467 > $\omega(x, x) = 0$.\cite{McDuff1998} The cross product operation in
468 > vector field is an example of symplectic form.
469 > Given vector spaces $V$ and $W$ over same field $F$, $f: V \to W$ is a linear transformation if
470 > \begin{eqnarray*}
471 > f(x+y) & = & f(x) + f(y) \\
472 > f(ax) & = & af(x)      
473 > \end{eqnarray*}
474 > are always satisfied for any two vectors $x$ and $y$ in $V$ and any scalar $a$ in $F$. One can define the dual vector space $V^*$ of $V$ if any two built-in linear transformations $\phi$ and $\psi$ in $V^*$ satisfy the following definition of addition and scalar multiplication:
475 > \begin{eqnarray*}
476 > (\phi+\psi)(x) & = & \phi(x)+\psi(x) \\
477 > (a\phi)(x) & = & a \phi(x)
478 > \end{eqnarray*}
479 > for all $a$ in $F$ and $x$ in $V$. For a manifold $M$, one can define a tangent vector of a tangent space $TM_q$ at every point $q$
480 > \begin{equation}
481 > \dot q = \mathop {\lim }\limits_{t \to 0} \frac{{\phi (t) - \phi (0)}}{t}      
482 > \end{equation}
483 > where $\phi(0)=q$ and $\phi(t) \in M$. One may also define a cotangent space $T^*M_q$ as the dual space of the tangent space $TM_q$. The tangent space and the cotangent space are isomorphic to each other, since they are both real vector spaces with same dimension.
484 > The union of tangent spaces at every point of $M$ is called the tangent bundle of $M$ and is denoted by $TM$, while cotangent bundle $T^*M$ is defined as the union of the cotangent spaces to $M$.\cite{Jost2002} For a Hamiltonian system with configuration manifold $V$, the $(q,\dot q)$ phase space is the tangent bundle of the configuration manifold $V$, while the cotangent bundle is represented by $(q,p)$.
485  
525 One of the motivations to study \emph{symplectic manifold} in
526 Hamiltonian Mechanics is that a symplectic manifold can represent
527 all possible configurations of the system and the phase space of the
528 system can be described by it's cotangent bundle. Every symplectic
529 manifold is even dimensional. For instance, in Hamilton equations,
530 coordinate and momentum always appear in pairs.
531
532 Let  $(M,\omega)$ and $(N, \eta)$ be symplectic manifolds. A map
533 \[
534 f : M \rightarrow N
535 \]
536 is a \emph{symplectomorphism} if it is a \emph{diffeomorphims} and
537 the \emph{pullback} of $\eta$ under f is equal to $\omega$.
538 Canonical transformation is an example of symplectomorphism in
539 classical mechanics.
540
486   \subsection{\label{introSection:ODE}Ordinary Differential Equations}
487  
488 < For a ordinary differential system defined as
488 > For an ordinary differential system defined as
489   \begin{equation}
490   \dot x = f(x)
491   \end{equation}
492 < where $x = x(q,p)^T$, this system is canonical Hamiltonian, if
492 > where $x = x(q,p)$, this system is a canonical Hamiltonian, if
493 > $f(x) = J\nabla _x H(x)$. Here, $H = H (q, p)$ is Hamiltonian
494 > function and $J$ is the skew-symmetric matrix
495   \begin{equation}
549 f(r) = J\nabla _x H(r).
550 \end{equation}
551 $H = H (q, p)$ is Hamiltonian function and $J$ is the skew-symmetric
552 matrix
553 \begin{equation}
496   J = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
497     0 & I  \\
498     { - I} & 0  \\
# Line 560 | Line 502 | system can be rewritten as,
502   where $I$ is an identity matrix. Using this notation, Hamiltonian
503   system can be rewritten as,
504   \begin{equation}
505 < \frac{d}{{dt}}x = J\nabla _x H(x)
505 > \frac{d}{{dt}}x = J\nabla _x H(x).
506   \label{introEquation:compactHamiltonian}
507   \end{equation}In this case, $f$ is
508 < called a \emph{Hamiltonian vector field}.
509 <
568 < Another generalization of Hamiltonian dynamics is Poisson Dynamics,
508 > called a \emph{Hamiltonian vector field}. Another generalization of
509 > Hamiltonian dynamics is Poisson Dynamics,\cite{Olver1986}
510   \begin{equation}
511   \dot x = J(x)\nabla _x H \label{introEquation:poissonHamiltonian}
512   \end{equation}
513 < The most obvious change being that matrix $J$ now depends on $x$.
514 < The free rigid body is an example of Poisson system (actually a
574 < Lie-Poisson system) with Hamiltonian function of angular kinetic
575 < energy.
576 < \begin{equation}
577 < J(\pi ) = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
578 <   0 & {\pi _3 } & { - \pi _2 }  \\
579 <   { - \pi _3 } & 0 & {\pi _1 }  \\
580 <   {\pi _2 } & { - \pi _1 } & 0  \\
581 < \end{array}} \right)
582 < \end{equation}
513 > where the most obvious change being that matrix $J$ now depends on
514 > $x$.
515  
516 < \begin{equation}
585 < H = \frac{1}{2}\left( {\frac{{\pi _1^2 }}{{I_1 }} + \frac{{\pi _2^2
586 < }}{{I_2 }} + \frac{{\pi _3^2 }}{{I_3 }}} \right)
587 < \end{equation}
516 > \subsection{\label{introSection:exactFlow}Exact Propagator}
517  
518 < \subsection{\label{introSection:exactFlow}Exact Flow}
519 <
591 < Let $x(t)$ be the exact solution of the ODE system,
518 > Let $x(t)$ be the exact solution of the ODE
519 > system,
520   \begin{equation}
521 < \frac{{dx}}{{dt}} = f(x) \label{introEquation:ODE}
522 < \end{equation}
523 < The exact flow(solution) $\varphi_\tau$ is defined by
524 < \[
525 < x(t+\tau) =\varphi_\tau(x(t))
521 > \frac{{dx}}{{dt}} = f(x), \label{introEquation:ODE}
522 > \end{equation} we can
523 > define its exact propagator $\varphi_\tau$:
524 > \[ x(t+\tau)
525 > =\varphi_\tau(x(t))
526   \]
527   where $\tau$ is a fixed time step and $\varphi$ is a map from phase
528 < space to itself. The flow has the continuous group property,
528 > space to itself. The propagator has the continuous group property,
529   \begin{equation}
530   \varphi _{\tau _1 }  \circ \varphi _{\tau _2 }  = \varphi _{\tau _1
531   + \tau _2 } .
# Line 606 | Line 534 | Therefore, the exact flow is self-adjoint,
534   \begin{equation}
535   \varphi _\tau   \circ \varphi _{ - \tau }  = I
536   \end{equation}
537 < Therefore, the exact flow is self-adjoint,
537 > Therefore, the exact propagator is self-adjoint,
538   \begin{equation}
539   \varphi _\tau   = \varphi _{ - \tau }^{ - 1}.
540   \end{equation}
541 < The exact flow can also be written in terms of the of an operator,
541 > In most cases, it is not easy to find the exact propagator
542 > $\varphi_\tau$. Instead, we use an approximate map, $\psi_\tau$,
543 > which is usually called an integrator. The order of an integrator
544 > $\psi_\tau$ is $p$, if the Taylor series of $\psi_\tau$ agree to
545 > order $p$,
546   \begin{equation}
547 < \varphi _\tau  (x) = e^{\tau \sum\limits_i {f_i (x)\frac{\partial
616 < }{{\partial x_i }}} } (x) \equiv \exp (\tau f)(x).
617 < \label{introEquation:exponentialOperator}
547 > \psi_\tau(x) = x + \tau f(x) + O(\tau^{p+1})
548   \end{equation}
549  
620 In most cases, it is not easy to find the exact flow $\varphi_\tau$.
621 Instead, we use a approximate map, $\psi_\tau$, which is usually
622 called integrator. The order of an integrator $\psi_\tau$ is $p$, if
623 the Taylor series of $\psi_\tau$ agree to order $p$,
624 \begin{equation}
625 \psi_tau(x) = x + \tau f(x) + O(\tau^{p+1})
626 \end{equation}
627
550   \subsection{\label{introSection:geometricProperties}Geometric Properties}
551  
552 < The hidden geometric properties of ODE and its flow play important
553 < roles in numerical studies. Many of them can be found in systems
554 < which occur naturally in applications.
555 <
556 < Let $\varphi$ be the flow of Hamiltonian vector field, $\varphi$ is
635 < a \emph{symplectic} flow if it satisfies,
552 > The hidden geometric properties\cite{Budd1999, Marsden1998} of an
553 > ODE and its propagator play important roles in numerical studies.
554 > Many of them can be found in systems which occur naturally in
555 > applications. Let $\varphi$ be the propagator of Hamiltonian vector
556 > field, $\varphi$ is a \emph{symplectic} propagator if it satisfies,
557   \begin{equation}
558   {\varphi '}^T J \varphi ' = J.
559   \end{equation}
560   According to Liouville's theorem, the symplectic volume is invariant
561 < under a Hamiltonian flow, which is the basis for classical
562 < statistical mechanics. Furthermore, the flow of a Hamiltonian vector
563 < field on a symplectic manifold can be shown to be a
561 > under a Hamiltonian propagator, which is the basis for classical
562 > statistical mechanics. Furthermore, the propagator of a Hamiltonian
563 > vector field on a symplectic manifold can be shown to be a
564   symplectomorphism. As to the Poisson system,
565   \begin{equation}
566   {\varphi '}^T J \varphi ' = J \circ \varphi
567   \end{equation}
568 < is the property must be preserved by the integrator.
569 <
570 < It is possible to construct a \emph{volume-preserving} flow for a
571 < source free($ \nabla \cdot f = 0 $) ODE, if the flow satisfies $
572 < \det d\varphi  = 1$. One can show easily that a symplectic flow will
573 < be volume-preserving.
574 <
654 < Changing the variables $y = h(x)$ in a ODE\ref{introEquation:ODE}
655 < will result in a new system,
568 > is the property that must be preserved by the integrator. It is
569 > possible to construct a \emph{volume-preserving} propagator for a
570 > source free ODE ($ \nabla \cdot f = 0 $), if the propagator
571 > satisfies $ \det d\varphi  = 1$. One can show easily that a
572 > symplectic propagator will be volume-preserving. Changing the
573 > variables $y = h(x)$ in an ODE (Eq.~\ref{introEquation:ODE}) will
574 > result in a new system,
575   \[
576   \dot y = \tilde f(y) = ((dh \cdot f)h^{ - 1} )(y).
577   \]
578   The vector filed $f$ has reversing symmetry $h$ if $f = - \tilde f$.
579 < In other words, the flow of this vector field is reversible if and
580 < only if $ h \circ \varphi ^{ - 1}  = \varphi  \circ h $.
581 <
582 < A \emph{first integral}, or conserved quantity of a general
583 < differential function is a function $ G:R^{2d}  \to R^d $ which is
665 < constant for all solutions of the ODE $\frac{{dx}}{{dt}} = f(x)$ ,
579 > In other words, the propagator of this vector field is reversible if
580 > and only if $ h \circ \varphi ^{ - 1}  = \varphi  \circ h $. A
581 > conserved quantity of a general differential function is a function
582 > $ G:R^{2d}  \to R^d $ which is constant for all solutions of the ODE
583 > $\frac{{dx}}{{dt}} = f(x)$ ,
584   \[
585   \frac{{dG(x(t))}}{{dt}} = 0.
586   \]
587 < Using chain rule, one may obtain,
587 > Using the chain rule, one may obtain,
588   \[
589 < \sum\limits_i {\frac{{dG}}{{dx_i }}} f_i (x) = f \bullet \nabla G,
589 > \sum\limits_i {\frac{{dG}}{{dx_i }}} f_i (x) = f \cdot \nabla G,
590   \]
591 < which is the condition for conserving \emph{first integral}. For a
592 < canonical Hamiltonian system, the time evolution of an arbitrary
593 < smooth function $G$ is given by,
594 < \begin{equation}
595 < \begin{array}{c}
596 < \frac{{dG(x(t))}}{{dt}} = [\nabla _x G(x(t))]^T \dot x(t) \\
679 <  = [\nabla _x G(x(t))]^T J\nabla _x H(x(t)). \\
680 < \end{array}
591 > which is the condition for conserved quantities. For a canonical
592 > Hamiltonian system, the time evolution of an arbitrary smooth
593 > function $G$ is given by,
594 > \begin{eqnarray}
595 > \frac{{dG(x(t))}}{{dt}} & = & [\nabla _x G(x(t))]^T \dot x(t) \notag\\
596 >                        & = & [\nabla _x G(x(t))]^T J\nabla _x H(x(t)).
597   \label{introEquation:firstIntegral1}
598 < \end{equation}
599 < Using poisson bracket notion, Equation
600 < \ref{introEquation:firstIntegral1} can be rewritten as
598 > \end{eqnarray}
599 > Using poisson bracket notion, Eq.~\ref{introEquation:firstIntegral1}
600 > can be rewritten as
601   \[
602   \frac{d}{{dt}}G(x(t)) = \left\{ {G,H} \right\}(x(t)).
603   \]
604 < Therefore, the sufficient condition for $G$ to be the \emph{first
605 < integral} of a Hamiltonian system is
606 < \[
607 < \left\{ {G,H} \right\} = 0.
608 < \]
609 < As well known, the Hamiltonian (or energy) H of a Hamiltonian system
610 < is a \emph{first integral}, which is due to the fact $\{ H,H\}  =
695 < 0$.
604 > Therefore, the sufficient condition for $G$ to be a conserved
605 > quantity of a Hamiltonian system is $\left\{ {G,H} \right\} = 0.$ As
606 > is well known, the Hamiltonian (or energy) H of a Hamiltonian system
607 > is a conserved quantity, which is due to the fact $\{ H,H\}  = 0$.
608 > When designing any numerical methods, one should always try to
609 > preserve the structural properties of the original ODE and its
610 > propagator.
611  
697
698 When designing any numerical methods, one should always try to
699 preserve the structural properties of the original ODE and its flow.
700
612   \subsection{\label{introSection:constructionSymplectic}Construction of Symplectic Methods}
613   A lot of well established and very effective numerical methods have
614 < been successful precisely because of their symplecticities even
614 > been successful precisely because of their symplectic nature even
615   though this fact was not recognized when they were first
616 < constructed. The most famous example is leapfrog methods in
617 < molecular dynamics. In general, symplectic integrators can be
616 > constructed. The most famous example is the Verlet-leapfrog method
617 > in molecular dynamics. In general, symplectic integrators can be
618   constructed using one of four different methods.
619   \begin{enumerate}
620   \item Generating functions
# Line 711 | Line 622 | constructed using one of four different methods.
622   \item Runge-Kutta methods
623   \item Splitting methods
624   \end{enumerate}
625 + Generating functions\cite{Channell1990} tend to lead to methods
626 + which are cumbersome and difficult to use. In dissipative systems,
627 + variational methods can capture the decay of energy
628 + accurately.\cite{Kane2000} Since they are geometrically unstable
629 + against non-Hamiltonian perturbations, ordinary implicit Runge-Kutta
630 + methods are not suitable for Hamiltonian
631 + system.\cite{Cartwright1992} Recently, various high-order explicit
632 + Runge-Kutta methods \cite{Owren1992,Chen2003} have been developed to
633 + overcome this instability. However, due to computational penalty
634 + involved in implementing the Runge-Kutta methods, they have not
635 + attracted much attention from the Molecular Dynamics community.
636 + Instead, splitting methods have been widely accepted since they
637 + exploit natural decompositions of the system.\cite{McLachlan1998,
638 + Tuckerman1992}
639  
640 < Generating function tends to lead to methods which are cumbersome
716 < and difficult to use. In dissipative systems, variational methods
717 < can capture the decay of energy accurately. Since their
718 < geometrically unstable nature against non-Hamiltonian perturbations,
719 < ordinary implicit Runge-Kutta methods are not suitable for
720 < Hamiltonian system. Recently, various high-order explicit
721 < Runge--Kutta methods have been developed to overcome this
722 < instability. However, due to computational penalty involved in
723 < implementing the Runge-Kutta methods, they do not attract too much
724 < attention from Molecular Dynamics community. Instead, splitting have
725 < been widely accepted since they exploit natural decompositions of
726 < the system\cite{Tuckerman92}.
640 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:splittingMethod}\textbf{Splitting Methods}}
641  
728 \subsubsection{\label{introSection:splittingMethod}Splitting Method}
729
642   The main idea behind splitting methods is to decompose the discrete
643 < $\varphi_h$ as a composition of simpler flows,
643 > $\varphi_h$ as a composition of simpler propagators,
644   \begin{equation}
645   \varphi _h  = \varphi _{h_1 }  \circ \varphi _{h_2 }  \ldots  \circ
646   \varphi _{h_n }
647   \label{introEquation:FlowDecomposition}
648   \end{equation}
649 < where each of the sub-flow is chosen such that each represent a
650 < simpler integration of the system.
651 <
740 < Suppose that a Hamiltonian system takes the form,
649 > where each of the sub-propagator is chosen such that each represent
650 > a simpler integration of the system. Suppose that a Hamiltonian
651 > system takes the form,
652   \[
653   H = H_1 + H_2.
654   \]
655   Here, $H_1$ and $H_2$ may represent different physical processes of
656   the system. For instance, they may relate to kinetic and potential
657   energy respectively, which is a natural decomposition of the
658 < problem. If $H_1$ and $H_2$ can be integrated using exact flows
659 < $\varphi_1(t)$ and $\varphi_2(t)$, respectively, a simple first
660 < order is then given by the Lie-Trotter formula
658 > problem. If $H_1$ and $H_2$ can be integrated using exact
659 > propagators $\varphi_1(t)$ and $\varphi_2(t)$, respectively, a
660 > simple first order expression is then given by the Lie-Trotter
661 > formula\cite{Trotter1959}
662   \begin{equation}
663   \varphi _h  = \varphi _{1,h}  \circ \varphi _{2,h},
664   \label{introEquation:firstOrderSplitting}
# Line 755 | Line 667 | It is easy to show that any composition of symplectic
667   continuous $\varphi _i$ over a time $h$. By definition, as
668   $\varphi_i(t)$ is the exact solution of a Hamiltonian system, it
669   must follow that each operator $\varphi_i(t)$ is a symplectic map.
670 < It is easy to show that any composition of symplectic flows yields a
671 < symplectic map,
670 > It is easy to show that any composition of symplectic propagators
671 > yields a symplectic map,
672   \begin{equation}
673   (\varphi '\phi ')^T J\varphi '\phi ' = \phi '^T \varphi '^T J\varphi
674   '\phi ' = \phi '^T J\phi ' = J,
# Line 764 | Line 676 | splitting in this context automatically generates a sy
676   \end{equation}
677   where $\phi$ and $\psi$ both are symplectic maps. Thus operator
678   splitting in this context automatically generates a symplectic map.
679 <
680 < The Lie-Trotter splitting(\ref{introEquation:firstOrderSplitting})
681 < introduces local errors proportional to $h^2$, while Strang
682 < splitting gives a second-order decomposition,
679 > The Lie-Trotter
680 > splitting(Eq.~\ref{introEquation:firstOrderSplitting}) introduces
681 > local errors proportional to $h^2$, while the Strang splitting gives
682 > a second-order decomposition,\cite{Strang1968}
683   \begin{equation}
684   \varphi _h  = \varphi _{1,h/2}  \circ \varphi _{2,h}  \circ \varphi
685   _{1,h/2} , \label{introEquation:secondOrderSplitting}
686   \end{equation}
687 < which has a local error proportional to $h^3$. Sprang splitting's
688 < popularity in molecular simulation community attribute to its
689 < symmetric property,
687 > which has a local error proportional to $h^3$. The Strang
688 > splitting's popularity in molecular simulation community attribute
689 > to its symmetric property,
690   \begin{equation}
691   \varphi _h^{ - 1} = \varphi _{ - h}.
692   \label{introEquation:timeReversible}
693   \end{equation}
694  
695 < \subsubsection{\label{introSection:exampleSplittingMethod}Example of Splitting Method}
695 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:exampleSplittingMethod}\textbf{Examples of the Splitting Method}}
696   The classical equation for a system consisting of interacting
697   particles can be written in Hamiltonian form,
698   \[
699   H = T + V
700   \]
701   where $T$ is the kinetic energy and $V$ is the potential energy.
702 < Setting $H_1 = T, H_2 = V$ and applying Strang splitting, one
702 > Setting $H_1 = T, H_2 = V$ and applying the Strang splitting, one
703   obtains the following:
704   \begin{align}
705   q(\Delta t) &= q(0) + \dot{q}(0)\Delta t +
# Line 800 | Line 712 | symplectic(\ref{introEquation:SymplecticFlowCompositio
712   \end{align}
713   where $F(t)$ is the force at time $t$. This integration scheme is
714   known as \emph{velocity verlet} which is
715 < symplectic(\ref{introEquation:SymplecticFlowComposition}),
716 < time-reversible(\ref{introEquation:timeReversible}) and
717 < volume-preserving (\ref{introEquation:volumePreserving}). These
715 > symplectic(Eq.~\ref{introEquation:SymplecticFlowComposition}),
716 > time-reversible(Eq.~\ref{introEquation:timeReversible}) and
717 > volume-preserving (Eq.~\ref{introEquation:volumePreserving}). These
718   geometric properties attribute to its long-time stability and its
719   popularity in the community. However, the most commonly used
720   velocity verlet integration scheme is written as below,
# Line 814 | Line 726 | q(\Delta t) &= q(0) + \Delta t\, \dot{q}\biggl (\frac{
726      \label{introEquation:Lp9b}\\%
727   %
728   \dot{q}(\Delta t) &= \dot{q}\biggl (\frac{\Delta t}{2}\biggr ) +
729 <    \frac{\Delta t}{2m}\, F[q(0)]. \label{introEquation:Lp9c}
729 >    \frac{\Delta t}{2m}\, F[q(t)]. \label{introEquation:Lp9c}
730   \end{align}
731   From the preceding splitting, one can see that the integration of
732   the equations of motion would follow:
# Line 823 | Line 735 | the equations of motion would follow:
735  
736   \item Use the half step velocities to move positions one whole step, $\Delta t$.
737  
738 < \item Evaluate the forces at the new positions, $\mathbf{r}(\Delta t)$, and use the new forces to complete the velocity move.
738 > \item Evaluate the forces at the new positions, $q(\Delta t)$, and use the new forces to complete the velocity move.
739  
740   \item Repeat from step 1 with the new position, velocities, and forces assuming the roles of the initial values.
741   \end{enumerate}
742 <
743 < Simply switching the order of splitting and composing, a new
744 < integrator, the \emph{position verlet} integrator, can be generated,
742 > By simply switching the order of the propagators in the splitting
743 > and composing a new integrator, the \emph{position verlet}
744 > integrator, can be generated,
745   \begin{align}
746   \dot q(\Delta t) &= \dot q(0) + \Delta tF(q(0))\left[ {q(0) +
747   \frac{{\Delta t}}{{2m}}\dot q(0)} \right], %
# Line 837 | Line 749 | q(\Delta t)} \right]. %
749   %
750   q(\Delta t) &= q(0) + \frac{{\Delta t}}{2}\left[ {\dot q(0) + \dot
751   q(\Delta t)} \right]. %
752 < \label{introEquation:positionVerlet1}
752 > \label{introEquation:positionVerlet2}
753   \end{align}
754  
755 < \subsubsection{\label{introSection:errorAnalysis}Error Analysis and Higher Order Methods}
755 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:errorAnalysis}\textbf{Error Analysis and Higher Order Methods}}
756  
757 < Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula can be used to determine the local
758 < error of splitting method in terms of commutator of the
759 < operators(\ref{introEquation:exponentialOperator}) associated with
760 < the sub-flow. For operators $hX$ and $hY$ which are associate to
761 < $\varphi_1(t)$ and $\varphi_2(t$ respectively , we have
757 > The Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula\cite{Gilmore1974} can be used
758 > to determine the local error of a splitting method in terms of the
759 > commutator of the
760 > operators(Eq.~\ref{introEquation:exponentialOperator}) associated
761 > with the sub-propagator. For operators $hX$ and $hY$ which are
762 > associated with $\varphi_1(t)$ and $\varphi_2(t)$ respectively , we
763 > have
764   \begin{equation}
765   \exp (hX + hY) = \exp (hZ)
766   \end{equation}
# Line 855 | Line 769 | Here, $[X,Y]$ is the commutators of operator $X$ and $
769   hZ = hX + hY + \frac{{h^2 }}{2}[X,Y] + \frac{{h^3 }}{2}\left(
770   {[X,[X,Y]] + [Y,[Y,X]]} \right) +  \ldots .
771   \end{equation}
772 < Here, $[X,Y]$ is the commutators of operator $X$ and $Y$ given by
772 > Here, $[X,Y]$ is the commutator of operator $X$ and $Y$ given by
773   \[
774   [X,Y] = XY - YX .
775   \]
776 < Applying Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula to Sprang splitting, we
777 < can obtain
776 > Applying the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula\cite{Varadarajan1974}
777 > to the Strang splitting, we can obtain
778   \begin{eqnarray*}
779 < \exp (h X/2)\exp (h Y)\exp (h X/2) & = & \exp (h X + h Y + h^2
780 < [X,Y]/4 + h^2 [Y,X]/4 \\ & & \mbox{} + h^2 [X,X]/8 + h^2 [Y,Y]/8 \\
781 < & & \mbox{} + h^3 [Y,[Y,X]]/12 - h^3 [X,[X,Y]]/24 & & \mbox{} +
782 < \ldots )
779 > \exp (h X/2)\exp (h Y)\exp (h X/2) & = & \exp (h X + h Y + h^2 [X,Y]/4 + h^2 [Y,X]/4 \\
780 >                                   &   & \mbox{} + h^2 [X,X]/8 + h^2 [Y,Y]/8 \\
781 >                                   &   & \mbox{} + h^3 [Y,[Y,X]]/12 - h^3[X,[X,Y]]/24 + \ldots
782 >                                   ).
783   \end{eqnarray*}
784 < Since \[ [X,Y] + [Y,X] = 0\] and \[ [X,X] = 0\], the dominant local
785 < error of Spring splitting is proportional to $h^3$. The same
786 < procedure can be applied to general splitting,  of the form
784 > Since $ [X,Y] + [Y,X] = 0$ and $ [X,X] = 0$, the dominant local
785 > error of Strang splitting is proportional to $h^3$. The same
786 > procedure can be applied to a general splitting of the form
787   \begin{equation}
788   \varphi _{b_m h}^2  \circ \varphi _{a_m h}^1  \circ \varphi _{b_{m -
789   1} h}^2  \circ  \ldots  \circ \varphi _{a_1 h}^1 .
790   \end{equation}
791 < Careful choice of coefficient $a_1 ,\ldot , b_m$ will lead to higher
792 < order method. Yoshida proposed an elegant way to compose higher
793 < order methods based on symmetric splitting. Given a symmetric second
794 < order base method $ \varphi _h^{(2)} $, a fourth-order symmetric
795 < method can be constructed by composing,
791 > A careful choice of coefficient $a_1 \ldots b_m$ will lead to higher
792 > order methods. Yoshida proposed an elegant way to compose higher
793 > order methods based on symmetric splitting.\cite{Yoshida1990} Given
794 > a symmetric second order base method $ \varphi _h^{(2)} $, a
795 > fourth-order symmetric method can be constructed by composing,
796   \[
797   \varphi _h^{(4)}  = \varphi _{\alpha h}^{(2)}  \circ \varphi _{\beta
798   h}^{(2)}  \circ \varphi _{\alpha h}^{(2)}
# Line 888 | Line 802 | _{\beta h}^{(2n)}  \circ \varphi _{\alpha h}^{(2n)}
802   integrator $ \varphi _h^{(2n + 2)}$ can be composed by
803   \begin{equation}
804   \varphi _h^{(2n + 2)}  = \varphi _{\alpha h}^{(2n)}  \circ \varphi
805 < _{\beta h}^{(2n)}  \circ \varphi _{\alpha h}^{(2n)}
805 > _{\beta h}^{(2n)}  \circ \varphi _{\alpha h}^{(2n)},
806   \end{equation}
807 < , if the weights are chosen as
807 > if the weights are chosen as
808   \[
809   \alpha  =  - \frac{{2^{1/(2n + 1)} }}{{2 - 2^{1/(2n + 1)} }},\beta =
810   \frac{{2^{1/(2n + 1)} }}{{2 - 2^{1/(2n + 1)} }} .
# Line 898 | Line 812 | As a special discipline of molecular modeling, Molecul
812  
813   \section{\label{introSection:molecularDynamics}Molecular Dynamics}
814  
815 < As a special discipline of molecular modeling, Molecular dynamics
816 < has proven to be a powerful tool for studying the functions of
817 < biological systems, providing structural, thermodynamic and
818 < dynamical information.
815 > As one of the principal tools of molecular modeling, Molecular
816 > dynamics has proven to be a powerful tool for studying the functions
817 > of biological systems, providing structural, thermodynamic and
818 > dynamical information. The basic idea of molecular dynamics is that
819 > macroscopic properties are related to microscopic behavior and
820 > microscopic behavior can be calculated from the trajectories in
821 > simulations. For instance, instantaneous temperature of a
822 > Hamiltonian system of $N$ particles can be measured by
823 > \[
824 > T = \sum\limits_{i = 1}^N {\frac{{m_i v_i^2 }}{{fk_B }}}
825 > \]
826 > where $m_i$ and $v_i$ are the mass and velocity of $i$th particle
827 > respectively, $f$ is the number of degrees of freedom, and $k_B$ is
828 > the Boltzman constant.
829  
830 < \subsection{\label{introSec:mdInit}Initialization}
830 > A typical molecular dynamics run consists of three essential steps:
831 > \begin{enumerate}
832 >  \item Initialization
833 >    \begin{enumerate}
834 >    \item Preliminary preparation
835 >    \item Minimization
836 >    \item Heating
837 >    \item Equilibration
838 >    \end{enumerate}
839 >  \item Production
840 >  \item Analysis
841 > \end{enumerate}
842 > These three individual steps will be covered in the following
843 > sections. Sec.~\ref{introSec:initialSystemSettings} deals with the
844 > initialization of a simulation. Sec.~\ref{introSection:production}
845 > discusses issues of production runs.
846 > Sec.~\ref{introSection:Analysis} provides the theoretical tools for
847 > analysis of trajectories.
848  
849 < \subsection{\label{introSec:forceEvaluation}Force Evaluation}
849 > \subsection{\label{introSec:initialSystemSettings}Initialization}
850  
851 < \subsection{\label{introSection:mdIntegration} Integration of the Equations of Motion}
851 > \subsubsection{\textbf{Preliminary preparation}}
852  
853 < \section{\label{introSection:rigidBody}Dynamics of Rigid Bodies}
853 > When selecting the starting structure of a molecule for molecular
854 > simulation, one may retrieve its Cartesian coordinates from public
855 > databases, such as RCSB Protein Data Bank \textit{etc}. Although
856 > thousands of crystal structures of molecules are discovered every
857 > year, many more remain unknown due to the difficulties of
858 > purification and crystallization. Even for molecules with known
859 > structures, some important information is missing. For example, a
860 > missing hydrogen atom which acts as donor in hydrogen bonding must
861 > be added. Moreover, in order to include electrostatic interactions,
862 > one may need to specify the partial charges for individual atoms.
863 > Under some circumstances, we may even need to prepare the system in
864 > a special configuration. For instance, when studying transport
865 > phenomenon in membrane systems, we may prepare the lipids in a
866 > bilayer structure instead of placing lipids randomly in solvent,
867 > since we are not interested in the slow self-aggregation process.
868  
869 < Rigid bodies are frequently involved in the modeling of different
915 < areas, from engineering, physics, to chemistry. For example,
916 < missiles and vehicle are usually modeled by rigid bodies.  The
917 < movement of the objects in 3D gaming engine or other physics
918 < simulator is governed by the rigid body dynamics. In molecular
919 < simulation, rigid body is used to simplify the model in
920 < protein-protein docking study{\cite{Gray03}}.
869 > \subsubsection{\textbf{Minimization}}
870  
871 < It is very important to develop stable and efficient methods to
872 < integrate the equations of motion of orientational degrees of
873 < freedom. Euler angles are the nature choice to describe the
874 < rotational degrees of freedom. However, due to its singularity, the
875 < numerical integration of corresponding equations of motion is very
876 < inefficient and inaccurate. Although an alternative integrator using
877 < different sets of Euler angles can overcome this difficulty\cite{},
878 < the computational penalty and the lost of angular momentum
879 < conservation still remain. A singularity free representation
880 < utilizing quaternions was developed by Evans in 1977. Unfortunately,
881 < this approach suffer from the nonseparable Hamiltonian resulted from
882 < quaternion representation, which prevents the symplectic algorithm
883 < to be utilized. Another different approach is to apply holonomic
884 < constraints to the atoms belonging to the rigid body. Each atom
885 < moves independently under the normal forces deriving from potential
886 < energy and constraint forces which are used to guarantee the
887 < rigidness. However, due to their iterative nature, SHAKE and Rattle
888 < algorithm converge very slowly when the number of constraint
889 < increases.
871 > It is quite possible that some of molecules in the system from
872 > preliminary preparation may be overlapping with each other. This
873 > close proximity leads to high initial potential energy which
874 > consequently jeopardizes any molecular dynamics simulations. To
875 > remove these steric overlaps, one typically performs energy
876 > minimization to find a more reasonable conformation. Several energy
877 > minimization methods have been developed to exploit the energy
878 > surface and to locate the local minimum. While converging slowly
879 > near the minimum, the steepest descent method is extremely robust when
880 > systems are strongly anharmonic. Thus, it is often used to refine
881 > structures from crystallographic data. Relying on the Hessian,
882 > advanced methods like Newton-Raphson converge rapidly to a local
883 > minimum, but become unstable if the energy surface is far from
884 > quadratic. Another factor that must be taken into account, when
885 > choosing energy minimization method, is the size of the system.
886 > Steepest descent and conjugate gradient can deal with models of any
887 > size. Because of the limits on computer memory to store the hessian
888 > matrix and the computing power needed to diagonalize these matrices,
889 > most Newton-Raphson methods can not be used with very large systems.
890  
891 < The break through in geometric literature suggests that, in order to
943 < develop a long-term integration scheme, one should preserve the
944 < symplectic structure of the flow. Introducing conjugate momentum to
945 < rotation matrix $A$ and re-formulating Hamiltonian's equation, a
946 < symplectic integrator, RSHAKE, was proposed to evolve the
947 < Hamiltonian system in a constraint manifold by iteratively
948 < satisfying the orthogonality constraint $A_t A = 1$. An alternative
949 < method using quaternion representation was developed by Omelyan.
950 < However, both of these methods are iterative and inefficient. In
951 < this section, we will present a symplectic Lie-Poisson integrator
952 < for rigid body developed by Dullweber and his coworkers\cite{}.
891 > \subsubsection{\textbf{Heating}}
892  
893 < \subsection{\label{introSection:lieAlgebra}Lie Algebra}
893 > Typically, heating is performed by assigning random velocities
894 > according to a Maxwell-Boltzman distribution for a desired
895 > temperature. Beginning at a lower temperature and gradually
896 > increasing the temperature by assigning larger random velocities, we
897 > end up setting the temperature of the system to a final temperature
898 > at which the simulation will be conducted. In the heating phase, we
899 > should also keep the system from drifting or rotating as a whole. To
900 > do this, the net linear momentum and angular momentum of the system
901 > is shifted to zero after each resampling from the Maxwell -Boltzman
902 > distribution.
903  
904 < \subsection{\label{introSection:constrainedHamiltonianRB}Constrained Hamiltonian for Rigid Body}
904 > \subsubsection{\textbf{Equilibration}}
905 >
906 > The purpose of equilibration is to allow the system to evolve
907 > spontaneously for a period of time and reach equilibrium. The
908 > procedure is continued until various statistical properties, such as
909 > temperature, pressure, energy, volume and other structural
910 > properties \textit{etc}, become independent of time. Strictly
911 > speaking, minimization and heating are not necessary, provided the
912 > equilibration process is long enough. However, these steps can serve
913 > as a mean to arrive at an equilibrated structure in an effective
914 > way.
915 >
916 > \subsection{\label{introSection:production}Production}
917 >
918 > The production run is the most important step of the simulation, in
919 > which the equilibrated structure is used as a starting point and the
920 > motions of the molecules are collected for later analysis. In order
921 > to capture the macroscopic properties of the system, the molecular
922 > dynamics simulation must be performed by sampling correctly and
923 > efficiently from the relevant thermodynamic ensemble.
924 >
925 > The most expensive part of a molecular dynamics simulation is the
926 > calculation of non-bonded forces, such as van der Waals force and
927 > Coulombic forces \textit{etc}. For a system of $N$ particles, the
928 > complexity of the algorithm for pair-wise interactions is $O(N^2 )$,
929 > which makes large simulations prohibitive in the absence of any
930 > algorithmic tricks. A natural approach to avoid system size issues
931 > is to represent the bulk behavior by a finite number of the
932 > particles. However, this approach will suffer from surface effects
933 > at the edges of the simulation. To offset this, \textit{Periodic
934 > boundary conditions} (see Fig.~\ref{introFig:pbc}) were developed to
935 > simulate bulk properties with a relatively small number of
936 > particles. In this method, the simulation box is replicated
937 > throughout space to form an infinite lattice. During the simulation,
938 > when a particle moves in the primary cell, its image in other cells
939 > move in exactly the same direction with exactly the same
940 > orientation. Thus, as a particle leaves the primary cell, one of its
941 > images will enter through the opposite face.
942 > \begin{figure}
943 > \centering
944 > \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{pbc.eps}
945 > \caption[An illustration of periodic boundary conditions]{A 2-D
946 > illustration of periodic boundary conditions. As one particle leaves
947 > the left of the simulation box, an image of it enters the right.}
948 > \label{introFig:pbc}
949 > \end{figure}
950  
951 + %cutoff and minimum image convention
952 + Another important technique to improve the efficiency of force
953 + evaluation is to apply spherical cutoffs where particles farther
954 + than a predetermined distance are not included in the
955 + calculation.\cite{Frenkel1996} The use of a cutoff radius will cause
956 + a discontinuity in the potential energy curve. Fortunately, one can
957 + shift a simple radial potential to ensure the potential curve go
958 + smoothly to zero at the cutoff radius. The cutoff strategy works
959 + well for Lennard-Jones interaction because of its short range
960 + nature. However, simply truncating the electrostatic interaction
961 + with the use of cutoffs has been shown to lead to severe artifacts
962 + in simulations. The Ewald summation, in which the slowly decaying
963 + Coulomb potential is transformed into direct and reciprocal sums
964 + with rapid and absolute convergence, has proved to minimize the
965 + periodicity artifacts in liquid simulations. Taking advantage of
966 + fast Fourier transform (FFT) techniques for calculating discrete
967 + Fourier transforms, the particle mesh-based
968 + methods\cite{Hockney1981,Shimada1993, Luty1994} are accelerated from
969 + $O(N^{3/2})$ to $O(N logN)$. An alternative approach is the
970 + \emph{fast multipole method}\cite{Greengard1987, Greengard1994},
971 + which treats Coulombic interactions exactly at short range, and
972 + approximate the potential at long range through multipolar
973 + expansion. In spite of their wide acceptance at the molecular
974 + simulation community, these two methods are difficult to implement
975 + correctly and efficiently. Instead, we use a damped and
976 + charge-neutralized Coulomb potential method developed by Wolf and
977 + his coworkers.\cite{Wolf1999} The shifted Coulomb potential for
978 + particle $i$ and particle $j$ at distance $r_{rj}$ is given by:
979   \begin{equation}
980 < H = \frac{1}{2}(p^T m^{ - 1} p) + \frac{1}{2}tr(PJ^{ - 1} P) +
981 < V(q,Q) + \frac{1}{2}tr[(QQ^T  - 1)\Lambda ].
982 < \label{introEquation:RBHamiltonian}
980 > V(r_{ij})= \frac{q_i q_j \textrm{erfc}(\alpha
981 > r_{ij})}{r_{ij}}-\lim_{r_{ij}\rightarrow
982 > R_\textrm{c}}\left\{\frac{q_iq_j \textrm{erfc}(\alpha
983 > r_{ij})}{r_{ij}}\right\}, \label{introEquation:shiftedCoulomb}
984   \end{equation}
985 < Here, $q$ and $Q$  are the position and rotation matrix for the
986 < rigid-body, $p$ and $P$  are conjugate momenta to $q$  and $Q$ , and
987 < $J$, a diagonal matrix, is defined by
985 > where $\alpha$ is the convergence parameter. Due to the lack of
986 > inherent periodicity and rapid convergence,this method is extremely
987 > efficient and easy to implement.
988 > \begin{figure}
989 > \centering
990 > \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{shifted_coulomb.eps}
991 > \caption[An illustration of shifted Coulomb potential]{An
992 > illustration of shifted Coulomb potential.}
993 > \label{introFigure:shiftedCoulomb}
994 > \end{figure}
995 >
996 > %multiple time step
997 >
998 > \subsection{\label{introSection:Analysis} Analysis}
999 >
1000 > Recently, advanced visualization techniques have been applied to
1001 > monitor the motions of molecules. Although the dynamics of the
1002 > system can be described qualitatively from animation, quantitative
1003 > trajectory analysis is more useful. According to the principles of
1004 > Statistical Mechanics in
1005 > Sec.~\ref{introSection:statisticalMechanics}, one can compute
1006 > thermodynamic properties, analyze fluctuations of structural
1007 > parameters, and investigate time-dependent processes of the molecule
1008 > from the trajectories.
1009 >
1010 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:thermodynamicsProperties}\textbf{Thermodynamic Properties}}
1011 >
1012 > Thermodynamic properties, which can be expressed in terms of some
1013 > function of the coordinates and momenta of all particles in the
1014 > system, can be directly computed from molecular dynamics. The usual
1015 > way to measure the pressure is based on virial theorem of Clausius
1016 > which states that the virial is equal to $-3Nk_BT$. For a system
1017 > with forces between particles, the total virial, $W$, contains the
1018 > contribution from external pressure and interaction between the
1019 > particles:
1020   \[
1021 < I_{ii}^{ - 1}  = \frac{1}{2}\sum\limits_{i \ne j} {J_{jj}^{ - 1} }
1021 > W =  - 3PV + \left\langle {\sum\limits_{i < j} {r{}_{ij} \cdot
1022 > f_{ij} } } \right\rangle
1023   \]
1024 < where $I_{ii}$ is the diagonal element of the inertia tensor. This
1025 < constrained Hamiltonian equation subjects to a holonomic constraint,
1024 > where $f_{ij}$ is the force between particle $i$ and $j$ at a
1025 > distance $r_{ij}$. Thus, the expression for the pressure is given
1026 > by:
1027   \begin{equation}
1028 < Q^T Q = 1$, \label{introEquation:orthogonalConstraint}
1028 > P = \frac{{Nk_B T}}{V} - \frac{1}{{3V}}\left\langle {\sum\limits_{i
1029 > < j} {r{}_{ij} \cdot f_{ij} } } \right\rangle
1030   \end{equation}
1031 < which is used to ensure rotation matrix's orthogonality.
1032 < Differentiating \ref{introEquation:orthogonalConstraint} and using
1033 < Equation \ref{introEquation:RBMotionMomentum}, one may obtain,
1031 >
1032 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:structuralProperties}\textbf{Structural Properties}}
1033 >
1034 > Structural Properties of a simple fluid can be described by a set of
1035 > distribution functions. Among these functions,the \emph{pair
1036 > distribution function}, also known as \emph{radial distribution
1037 > function}, is of most fundamental importance to liquid theory.
1038 > Experimentally, pair distribution functions can be gathered by
1039 > Fourier transforming raw data from a series of neutron diffraction
1040 > experiments and integrating over the surface
1041 > factor.\cite{Powles1973} The experimental results can serve as a
1042 > criterion to justify the correctness of a liquid model. Moreover,
1043 > various equilibrium thermodynamic and structural properties can also
1044 > be expressed in terms of the radial distribution
1045 > function.\cite{Allen1987} The pair distribution functions $g(r)$
1046 > gives the probability that a particle $i$ will be located at a
1047 > distance $r$ from a another particle $j$ in the system
1048   \begin{equation}
1049 < Q^t PJ^{ - 1}  + J^{ - 1} P^t Q = 0 . \\
1050 < \label{introEquation:RBFirstOrderConstraint}
1049 > g(r) = \frac{V}{{N^2 }}\left\langle {\sum\limits_i {\sum\limits_{j
1050 > \ne i} {\delta (r - r_{ij} )} } } \right\rangle = \frac{\rho
1051 > (r)}{\rho}.
1052   \end{equation}
1053 + Note that the delta function can be replaced by a histogram in
1054 + computer simulation. Peaks in $g(r)$ represent solvent shells, and
1055 + the height of these peaks gradually decreases to 1 as the liquid of
1056 + large distance approaches the bulk density.
1057  
982 Using Equation (\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate},
983 \ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianMomentum}), one can write down
984 the equations of motion,
985 \[
986 \begin{array}{c}
987 \frac{{dq}}{{dt}} = \frac{p}{m} \label{introEquation:RBMotionPosition}\\
988 \frac{{dp}}{{dt}} =  - \nabla _q V(q,Q) \label{introEquation:RBMotionMomentum}\\
989 \frac{{dQ}}{{dt}} = PJ^{ - 1}  \label{introEquation:RBMotionRotation}\\
990 \frac{{dP}}{{dt}} =  - \nabla _q V(q,Q) - 2Q\Lambda . \label{introEquation:RBMotionP}\\
991 \end{array}
992 \]
1058  
1059 + \subsubsection{\label{introSection:timeDependentProperties}\textbf{Time-dependent
1060 + Properties}}
1061  
1062 < \[
1063 < M = \left\{ {(Q,P):Q^T Q = 1,Q^t PJ^{ - 1}  + J^{ - 1} P^t Q = 0}
1064 < \right\} .
1065 < \]
1062 > Time-dependent properties are usually calculated using \emph{time
1063 > correlation functions}, which correlate random variables $A$ and $B$
1064 > at two different times,
1065 > \begin{equation}
1066 > C_{AB} (t) = \left\langle {A(t)B(0)} \right\rangle.
1067 > \label{introEquation:timeCorrelationFunction}
1068 > \end{equation}
1069 > If $A$ and $B$ refer to same variable, this kind of correlation
1070 > functions are called \emph{autocorrelation functions}. One typical example is the velocity autocorrelation
1071 > function which is directly related to transport properties of
1072 > molecular liquids:
1073 > \begin{equation}
1074 > D = \frac{1}{3}\int\limits_0^\infty  {\left\langle {v(t) \cdot v(0)}
1075 > \right\rangle } dt
1076 > \end{equation}
1077 > where $D$ is diffusion constant. Unlike the velocity autocorrelation
1078 > function, which is averaged over time origins and over all the
1079 > atoms, the dipole autocorrelation functions is calculated for the
1080 > entire system. The dipole autocorrelation function is given by:
1081 > \begin{equation}
1082 > c_{dipole}  = \left\langle {u_{tot} (t) \cdot u_{tot} (t)}
1083 > \right\rangle
1084 > \end{equation}
1085 > Here $u_{tot}$ is the net dipole of the entire system and is given
1086 > by
1087 > \begin{equation}
1088 > u_{tot} (t) = \sum\limits_i {u_i (t)}.
1089 > \end{equation}
1090 > In principle, many time correlation functions can be related to
1091 > Fourier transforms of the infrared, Raman, and inelastic neutron
1092 > scattering spectra of molecular liquids. In practice, one can
1093 > extract the IR spectrum from the intensity of the molecular dipole
1094 > fluctuation at each frequency using the following relationship:
1095 > \begin{equation}
1096 > \hat c_{dipole} (v) = \int_{ - \infty }^\infty  {c_{dipole} (t)e^{ -
1097 > i2\pi vt} dt}.
1098 > \end{equation}
1099  
1100 < \subsection{\label{introSection:DLMMotionEquation}The Euler Equations of Rigid Body Motion}
1100 > \section{\label{introSection:rigidBody}Dynamics of Rigid Bodies}
1101  
1102 < \subsection{\label{introSection:symplecticDiscretizationRB}Symplectic Discretization of Euler Equations}
1102 > Rigid bodies are frequently involved in the modeling of different
1103 > areas, including engineering, physics and chemistry. For example,
1104 > missiles and vehicles are usually modeled by rigid bodies.  The
1105 > movement of the objects in 3D gaming engines or other physics
1106 > simulators is governed by rigid body dynamics. In molecular
1107 > simulations, rigid bodies are used to simplify protein-protein
1108 > docking studies.\cite{Gray2003}
1109  
1110 + It is very important to develop stable and efficient methods to
1111 + integrate the equations of motion for orientational degrees of
1112 + freedom. Euler angles are the natural choice to describe the
1113 + rotational degrees of freedom. However, due to $\frac {1}{sin
1114 + \theta}$ singularities, the numerical integration of corresponding
1115 + equations of these motion is very inefficient and inaccurate.
1116 + Although an alternative integrator using multiple sets of Euler
1117 + angles can overcome this difficulty\cite{Barojas1973}, the
1118 + computational penalty and the loss of angular momentum conservation
1119 + still remain. A singularity-free representation utilizing
1120 + quaternions was developed by Evans in 1977.\cite{Evans1977}
1121 + Unfortunately, this approach used a nonseparable Hamiltonian
1122 + resulting from the quaternion representation, which prevented the
1123 + symplectic algorithm from being utilized. Another different approach
1124 + is to apply holonomic constraints to the atoms belonging to the
1125 + rigid body. Each atom moves independently under the normal forces
1126 + deriving from potential energy and constraint forces which are used
1127 + to guarantee the rigidness. However, due to their iterative nature,
1128 + the SHAKE and Rattle algorithms also converge very slowly when the
1129 + number of constraints increases.\cite{Ryckaert1977, Andersen1983}
1130  
1131 < \section{\label{introSection:langevinDynamics}Langevin Dynamics}
1131 > A break-through in geometric literature suggests that, in order to
1132 > develop a long-term integration scheme, one should preserve the
1133 > symplectic structure of the propagator. By introducing a conjugate
1134 > momentum to the rotation matrix $Q$ and re-formulating Hamiltonian's
1135 > equation, a symplectic integrator, RSHAKE\cite{Kol1997}, was
1136 > proposed to evolve the Hamiltonian system in a constraint manifold
1137 > by iteratively satisfying the orthogonality constraint $Q^T Q = 1$.
1138 > An alternative method using the quaternion representation was
1139 > developed by Omelyan.\cite{Omelyan1998} However, both of these
1140 > methods are iterative and inefficient. In this section, we descibe a
1141 > symplectic Lie-Poisson integrator for rigid bodies developed by
1142 > Dullweber and his coworkers\cite{Dullweber1997} in depth.
1143  
1144 < \subsection{\label{introSection:LDIntroduction}Introduction and application of Langevin Dynamics}
1145 <
1009 < \subsection{\label{introSection:generalizedLangevinDynamics}Generalized Langevin Dynamics}
1010 <
1144 > \subsection{\label{introSection:constrainedHamiltonianRB}Constrained Hamiltonian for Rigid Bodies}
1145 > The Hamiltonian of a rigid body is given by
1146   \begin{equation}
1147 < H = \frac{{p^2 }}{{2m}} + U(x) + H_B  + \Delta U(x,x_1 , \ldots x_N)
1148 < \label{introEquation:bathGLE}
1147 > H = \frac{1}{2}(p^T m^{ - 1} p) + \frac{1}{2}tr(PJ^{ - 1} P) +
1148 > V(q,Q) + \frac{1}{2}tr[(QQ^T  - 1)\Lambda ].
1149 > \label{introEquation:RBHamiltonian}
1150   \end{equation}
1151 < where $H_B$ is harmonic bath Hamiltonian,
1151 > Here, $q$ and $Q$  are the position vector and rotation matrix for
1152 > the rigid-body, $p$ and $P$  are conjugate momenta to $q$  and $Q$ ,
1153 > and $J$, a diagonal matrix, is defined by
1154   \[
1155 < H_B  =\sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{ {\frac{{p_\alpha ^2
1018 < }}{{2m_\alpha  }} + \frac{1}{2}m_\alpha  w_\alpha ^2 } \right\}}
1155 > I_{ii}^{ - 1}  = \frac{1}{2}\sum\limits_{i \ne j} {J_{jj}^{ - 1} }
1156   \]
1157 < and $\Delta U$ is bilinear system-bath coupling,
1158 < \[
1159 < \Delta U =  - \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {g_\alpha  x_\alpha  x}
1160 < \]
1161 < Completing the square,
1157 > where $I_{ii}$ is the diagonal element of the inertia tensor. This
1158 > constrained Hamiltonian equation is subjected to a holonomic
1159 > constraint,
1160 > \begin{equation}
1161 > Q^T Q = 1, \label{introEquation:orthogonalConstraint}
1162 > \end{equation}
1163 > which is used to ensure the rotation matrix's unitarity. Using
1164 > Eq.~\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate} and Eq.~
1165 > \ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianMomentum}, one can write down
1166 > the equations of motion,
1167 > \begin{eqnarray}
1168 > \frac{{dq}}{{dt}} & = & \frac{p}{m}, \label{introEquation:RBMotionPosition}\\
1169 > \frac{{dp}}{{dt}} & = & - \nabla _q V(q,Q), \label{introEquation:RBMotionMomentum}\\
1170 > \frac{{dQ}}{{dt}} & = & PJ^{ - 1},  \label{introEquation:RBMotionRotation}\\
1171 > \frac{{dP}}{{dt}} & = & - \nabla _Q V(q,Q) - 2Q\Lambda . \label{introEquation:RBMotionP}
1172 > \end{eqnarray}
1173 > Differentiating Eq.~\ref{introEquation:orthogonalConstraint} and
1174 > using Eq.~\ref{introEquation:RBMotionMomentum}, one may obtain,
1175 > \begin{equation}
1176 > Q^T PJ^{ - 1}  + J^{ - 1} P^T Q = 0 . \\
1177 > \label{introEquation:RBFirstOrderConstraint}
1178 > \end{equation}
1179 > In general, there are two ways to satisfy the holonomic constraints.
1180 > We can use a constraint force provided by a Lagrange multiplier on
1181 > the normal manifold to keep the motion on the constraint space. Or
1182 > we can simply evolve the system on the constraint manifold. These
1183 > two methods have been proved to be equivalent. The holonomic
1184 > constraint and equations of motions define a constraint manifold for
1185 > rigid bodies
1186   \[
1187 < H_B  + \Delta U = \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{
1188 < {\frac{{p_\alpha ^2 }}{{2m_\alpha  }} + \frac{1}{2}m_\alpha
1028 < w_\alpha ^2 \left( {x_\alpha   - \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{m_\alpha
1029 < w_\alpha ^2 }}x} \right)^2 } \right\}}  - \sum\limits_{\alpha  =
1030 < 1}^N {\frac{{g_\alpha ^2 }}{{2m_\alpha  w_\alpha ^2 }}} x^2
1187 > M = \left\{ {(Q,P):Q^T Q = 1,Q^T PJ^{ - 1}  + J^{ - 1} P^T Q = 0}
1188 > \right\}.
1189   \]
1190 < and putting it back into Eq.~\ref{introEquation:bathGLE},
1190 > Unfortunately, this constraint manifold is not $T^* SO(3)$ which is
1191 > a symplectic manifold on Lie rotation group $SO(3)$. However, it
1192 > turns out that under symplectic transformation, the cotangent space
1193 > and the phase space are diffeomorphic. By introducing
1194   \[
1195 < H = \frac{{p^2 }}{{2m}} + W(x) + \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N
1035 < {\left\{ {\frac{{p_\alpha ^2 }}{{2m_\alpha  }} + \frac{1}{2}m_\alpha
1036 < w_\alpha ^2 \left( {x_\alpha   - \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{m_\alpha
1037 < w_\alpha ^2 }}x} \right)^2 } \right\}}
1195 > \tilde Q = Q,\tilde P = \frac{1}{2}\left( {P - QP^T Q} \right),
1196   \]
1197 < where
1197 > the mechanical system subjected to a holonomic constraint manifold $M$
1198 > can be re-formulated as a Hamiltonian system on the cotangent space
1199   \[
1200 < W(x) = U(x) - \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\frac{{g_\alpha ^2
1201 < }}{{2m_\alpha  w_\alpha ^2 }}} x^2
1200 > T^* SO(3) = \left\{ {(\tilde Q,\tilde P):\tilde Q^T \tilde Q =
1201 > 1,\tilde Q^T \tilde PJ^{ - 1}  + J^{ - 1} P^T \tilde Q = 0} \right\}
1202   \]
1203 < Since the first two terms of the new Hamiltonian depend only on the
1204 < system coordinates, we can get the equations of motion for
1205 < Generalized Langevin Dynamics by Hamilton's equations
1206 < \ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate,
1207 < introEquation:motionHamiltonianMomentum},
1208 < \begin{align}
1209 < \dot p &=  - \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial x}}
1051 <       &= m\ddot x
1052 <       &= - \frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}} - \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {g_\alpha  \left( {x_\alpha   - \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{m_\alpha  w_\alpha ^2 }}x} \right)}
1053 < \label{introEquation:Lp5}
1054 < \end{align}
1055 < , and
1056 < \begin{align}
1057 < \dot p_\alpha   &=  - \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial x_\alpha  }}
1058 <                &= m\ddot x_\alpha
1059 <                &= \- m_\alpha  w_\alpha ^2 \left( {x_\alpha   - \frac{{g_\alpha}}{{m_\alpha  w_\alpha ^2 }}x} \right)
1060 < \end{align}
1061 <
1062 < \subsection{\label{introSection:laplaceTransform}The Laplace Transform}
1063 <
1203 > For a body fixed vector $X_i$ with respect to the center of mass of
1204 > the rigid body, its corresponding lab fixed vector $X_i^{lab}$  is
1205 > given as
1206 > \begin{equation}
1207 > X_i^{lab} = Q X_i + q.
1208 > \end{equation}
1209 > Therefore, potential energy $V(q,Q)$ is defined by
1210   \[
1211 < L(x) = \int_0^\infty  {x(t)e^{ - pt} dt}
1211 > V(q,Q) = V(Q X_0 + q).
1212   \]
1213 <
1213 > Hence, the force and torque are given by
1214   \[
1215 < L(x + y) = L(x) + L(y)
1215 > \nabla _q V(q,Q) = F(q,Q) = \sum\limits_i {F_i (q,Q)},
1216   \]
1217 <
1217 > and
1218   \[
1219 < L(ax) = aL(x)
1219 > \nabla _Q V(q,Q) = F(q,Q)X_i^t
1220   \]
1221 <
1221 > respectively. As a common choice to describe the rotation dynamics
1222 > of the rigid body, the angular momentum on the body fixed frame $\Pi
1223 > = Q^t P$ is introduced to rewrite the equations of motion,
1224 > \begin{equation}
1225 > \begin{array}{l}
1226 > \dot \Pi  = J^{ - 1} \Pi ^T \Pi  + Q^T \sum\limits_i {F_i (q,Q)X_i^T }  - \Lambda,  \\
1227 > \dot Q  = Q\Pi {\rm{ }}J^{ - 1},  \\
1228 > \end{array}
1229 > \label{introEqaution:RBMotionPI}
1230 > \end{equation}
1231 > as well as holonomic constraints $\Pi J^{ - 1}  + J^{ - 1} \Pi ^t  =
1232 > 0$ and $Q^T Q = 1$. For a vector $v(v_1 ,v_2 ,v_3 ) \in R^3$ and a
1233 > matrix $\hat v \in so(3)^ \star$, the hat-map isomorphism,
1234 > \begin{equation}
1235 > v(v_1 ,v_2 ,v_3 ) \Leftrightarrow \hat v = \left(
1236 > {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
1237 >   0 & { - v_3 } & {v_2 }  \\
1238 >   {v_3 } & 0 & { - v_1 }  \\
1239 >   { - v_2 } & {v_1 } & 0  \\
1240 > \end{array}} \right),
1241 > \label{introEquation:hatmapIsomorphism}
1242 > \end{equation}
1243 > will let us associate the matrix products with traditional vector
1244 > operations
1245   \[
1246 < L(\dot x) = pL(x) - px(0)
1246 > \hat vu = v \times u.
1247   \]
1248 <
1248 > Using Eq.~\ref{introEqaution:RBMotionPI}, one can construct a skew
1249 > matrix,
1250 > \begin{eqnarray}
1251 > (\dot \Pi  - \dot \Pi ^T )&= &(\Pi  - \Pi ^T )(J^{ - 1} \Pi  + \Pi J^{ - 1} ) \notag \\
1252 > & & + \sum\limits_i {[Q^T F_i (r,Q)X_i^T  - X_i F_i (r,Q)^T Q]}  -
1253 > (\Lambda  - \Lambda ^T ). \label{introEquation:skewMatrixPI}
1254 > \end{eqnarray}
1255 > Since $\Lambda$ is symmetric, the last term of
1256 > Eq.~\ref{introEquation:skewMatrixPI} is zero, which implies the
1257 > Lagrange multiplier $\Lambda$ is absent from the equations of
1258 > motion. This unique property eliminates the requirement of
1259 > iterations which can not be avoided in other methods.\cite{Kol1997,
1260 > Omelyan1998} Applying the hat-map isomorphism, we obtain the
1261 > equation of motion for angular momentum in the body frame
1262 > \begin{equation}
1263 > \dot \pi  = \pi  \times I^{ - 1} \pi  + \sum\limits_i {\left( {Q^T
1264 > F_i (r,Q)} \right) \times X_i }.
1265 > \label{introEquation:bodyAngularMotion}
1266 > \end{equation}
1267 > In the same manner, the equation of motion for rotation matrix is
1268 > given by
1269   \[
1270 < L(\ddot x) = p^2 L(x) - px(0) - \dot x(0)
1270 > \dot Q = Qskew(I^{ - 1} \pi ).
1271   \]
1272  
1273 < \[
1274 < L\left( {\int_0^t {g(t - \tau )h(\tau )d\tau } } \right) = G(p)H(p)
1086 < \]
1273 > \subsection{\label{introSection:SymplecticFreeRB}Symplectic
1274 > Lie-Poisson Integrator for Free Rigid Bodies}
1275  
1276 < Some relatively important transformation,
1277 < \[
1278 < L(\cos at) = \frac{p}{{p^2  + a^2 }}
1276 > If there are no external forces exerted on the rigid body, the only
1277 > contribution to the rotational motion is from the kinetic energy
1278 > (the first term of \ref{introEquation:bodyAngularMotion}). The free
1279 > rigid body is an example of a Lie-Poisson system with Hamiltonian
1280 > function
1281 > \begin{equation}
1282 > T^r (\pi ) = T_1 ^r (\pi _1 ) + T_2^r (\pi _2 ) + T_3^r (\pi _3 )
1283 > \label{introEquation:rotationalKineticRB}
1284 > \end{equation}
1285 > where $T_i^r (\pi _i ) = \frac{{\pi _i ^2 }}{{2I_i }}$ and
1286 > Lie-Poisson structure matrix,
1287 > \begin{equation}
1288 > J(\pi ) = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
1289 >   0 & {\pi _3 } & { - \pi _2 }  \\
1290 >   { - \pi _3 } & 0 & {\pi _1 }  \\
1291 >   {\pi _2 } & { - \pi _1 } & 0  \\
1292 > \end{array}} \right).
1293 > \end{equation}
1294 > Thus, the dynamics of free rigid body is governed by
1295 > \begin{equation}
1296 > \frac{d}{{dt}}\pi  = J(\pi )\nabla _\pi  T^r (\pi ).
1297 > \end{equation}
1298 > One may notice that each $T_i^r$ in
1299 > Eq.~\ref{introEquation:rotationalKineticRB} can be solved exactly.
1300 > For instance, the equations of motion due to $T_1^r$ are given by
1301 > \begin{equation}
1302 > \frac{d}{{dt}}\pi  = R_1 \pi ,\frac{d}{{dt}}Q = QR_1
1303 > \label{introEqaution:RBMotionSingleTerm}
1304 > \end{equation}
1305 > with
1306 > \[ R_1  = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
1307 >   0 & 0 & 0  \\
1308 >   0 & 0 & {\pi _1 }  \\
1309 >   0 & { - \pi _1 } & 0  \\
1310 > \end{array}} \right).
1311   \]
1312 <
1312 > The solutions of Eq.~\ref{introEqaution:RBMotionSingleTerm} is
1313   \[
1314 < L(\sin at) = \frac{a}{{p^2  + a^2 }}
1314 > \pi (\Delta t) = e^{\Delta tR_1 } \pi (0),Q(\Delta t) =
1315 > Q(0)e^{\Delta tR_1 }
1316   \]
1317 <
1317 > with
1318   \[
1319 < L(1) = \frac{1}{p}
1319 > e^{\Delta tR_1 }  = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
1320 >   0 & 0 & 0  \\
1321 >   0 & {\cos \theta _1 } & {\sin \theta _1 }  \\
1322 >   0 & { - \sin \theta _1 } & {\cos \theta _1 }  \\
1323 > \end{array}} \right),\theta _1  = \frac{{\pi _1 }}{{I_1 }}\Delta t.
1324 > \]
1325 > To reduce the cost of computing expensive functions in $e^{\Delta
1326 > tR_1 }$, we can use the Cayley transformation to obtain a
1327 > single-aixs propagator,
1328 > \begin{eqnarray*}
1329 > e^{\Delta tR_1 }  & \approx & (1 - \Delta tR_1 )^{ - 1} (1 + \Delta
1330 > tR_1 ) \\
1331 > %
1332 > & \approx & \left( \begin{array}{ccc}
1333 > 1 & 0 & 0 \\
1334 > 0 & \frac{1-\theta^2 / 4}{1 + \theta^2 / 4}  & -\frac{\theta}{1+
1335 > \theta^2 / 4} \\
1336 > 0 & \frac{\theta}{1+ \theta^2 / 4} & \frac{1-\theta^2 / 4}{1 +
1337 > \theta^2 / 4}
1338 > \end{array}
1339 > \right).
1340 > \end{eqnarray*}
1341 > The propagators for $T_2^r$ and $T_3^r$ can be found in the same
1342 > manner. In order to construct a second-order symplectic method, we
1343 > split the angular kinetic Hamiltonian function into five terms
1344 > \[
1345 > T^r (\pi ) = \frac{1}{2}T_1 ^r (\pi _1 ) + \frac{1}{2}T_2^r (\pi _2
1346 > ) + T_3^r (\pi _3 ) + \frac{1}{2}T_2^r (\pi _2 ) + \frac{1}{2}T_1 ^r
1347 > (\pi _1 ).
1348   \]
1349 + By concatenating the propagators corresponding to these five terms,
1350 + we can obtain an symplectic integrator,
1351 + \[
1352 + \varphi _{\Delta t,T^r }  = \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _1 }  \circ
1353 + \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _2 }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t,\pi _3 }
1354 + \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _2 }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi
1355 + _1 }.
1356 + \]
1357 + The non-canonical Lie-Poisson bracket $\{F, G\}$ of two functions $F(\pi )$ and $G(\pi )$ is defined by
1358 + \[
1359 + \{ F,G\} (\pi ) = [\nabla _\pi  F(\pi )]^T J(\pi )\nabla _\pi  G(\pi
1360 + ).
1361 + \]
1362 + If the Poisson bracket of a function $F$ with an arbitrary smooth
1363 + function $G$ is zero, $F$ is a \emph{Casimir}, which is the
1364 + conserved quantity in Poisson system. We can easily verify that the
1365 + norm of the angular momentum, $\parallel \pi
1366 + \parallel$, is a \emph{Casimir}.\cite{McLachlan1993} Let $F(\pi ) = S(\frac{{\parallel
1367 + \pi \parallel ^2 }}{2})$ for an arbitrary function $ S:R \to R$ ,
1368 + then by the chain rule
1369 + \[
1370 + \nabla _\pi  F(\pi ) = S'(\frac{{\parallel \pi \parallel ^2
1371 + }}{2})\pi.
1372 + \]
1373 + Thus, $ [\nabla _\pi  F(\pi )]^T J(\pi ) =  - S'(\frac{{\parallel
1374 + \pi
1375 + \parallel ^2 }}{2})\pi  \times \pi  = 0 $. This explicit
1376 + Lie-Poisson integrator is found to be both extremely efficient and
1377 + stable. These properties can be explained by the fact the small
1378 + angle approximation is used and the norm of the angular momentum is
1379 + conserved.
1380  
1381 < First, the bath coordinates,
1381 > \subsection{\label{introSection:RBHamiltonianSplitting} Hamiltonian
1382 > Splitting for Rigid Body}
1383 >
1384 > The Hamiltonian of rigid body can be separated in terms of kinetic
1385 > energy and potential energy, $H = T(p,\pi ) + V(q,Q)$. The equations
1386 > of motion corresponding to potential energy and kinetic energy are
1387 > listed in Table~\ref{introTable:rbEquations}.
1388 > \begin{table}
1389 > \caption{EQUATIONS OF MOTION DUE TO POTENTIAL AND KINETIC ENERGIES}
1390 > \label{introTable:rbEquations}
1391 > \begin{center}
1392 > \begin{tabular}{|l|l|}
1393 >  \hline
1394 >  % after \\: \hline or \cline{col1-col2} \cline{col3-col4} ...
1395 >  Potential & Kinetic \\
1396 >  $\frac{{dq}}{{dt}} = \frac{p}{m}$ & $\frac{d}{{dt}}q = p$ \\
1397 >  $\frac{d}{{dt}}p =  - \frac{{\partial V}}{{\partial q}}$ & $ \frac{d}{{dt}}p = 0$ \\
1398 >  $\frac{d}{{dt}}Q = 0$ & $ \frac{d}{{dt}}Q = Qskew(I^{ - 1} j)$ \\
1399 >  $ \frac{d}{{dt}}\pi  = \sum\limits_i {\left( {Q^T F_i (r,Q)} \right) \times X_i }$ & $\frac{d}{{dt}}\pi  = \pi  \times I^{ - 1} \pi$\\
1400 >  \hline
1401 > \end{tabular}
1402 > \end{center}
1403 > \end{table}
1404 > A second-order symplectic method is now obtained by the composition
1405 > of the position and velocity propagators,
1406   \[
1407 < p^2 L(x_\alpha  ) - px_\alpha  (0) - \dot x_\alpha  (0) =  - \omega
1408 < _\alpha ^2 L(x_\alpha  ) + \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{\omega _\alpha
1105 < }}L(x)
1407 > \varphi _{\Delta t}  = \varphi _{\Delta t/2,V}  \circ \varphi
1408 > _{\Delta t,T}  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,V}.
1409   \]
1410 + Moreover, $\varphi _{\Delta t/2,V}$ can be divided into two
1411 + sub-propagators which corresponding to force and torque
1412 + respectively,
1413   \[
1414 < L(x_\alpha  ) = \frac{{\frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{\omega _\alpha  }}L(x) +
1415 < px_\alpha  (0) + \dot x_\alpha  (0)}}{{p^2  + \omega _\alpha ^2 }}
1414 > \varphi _{\Delta t/2,V}  = \varphi _{\Delta t/2,F}  \circ \varphi
1415 > _{\Delta t/2,\tau }.
1416   \]
1417 < Then, the system coordinates,
1418 < \begin{align}
1419 < mL(\ddot x) &=  - \frac{1}{p}\frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}} -
1420 < \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{ {\frac{{\frac{{g_\alpha
1421 < }}{{\omega _\alpha  }}L(x) + px_\alpha  (0) + \dot x_\alpha
1422 < (0)}}{{p^2  + \omega _\alpha ^2 }} - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2 }}{{m_\alpha
1423 < }}\omega _\alpha ^2 L(x)} \right\}}
1424 < %
1425 < &= - \frac{1}{p}\frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}} -
1426 < \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{ { - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2 }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }}\frac{p}{{p^2  + \omega _\alpha ^2 }}pL(x)
1427 < - \frac{p}{{p^2  + \omega _\alpha ^2 }}g_\alpha  x_\alpha  (0)
1428 < - \frac{1}{{p^2  + \omega _\alpha ^2 }}g_\alpha  \dot x_\alpha  (0)} \right\}}
1429 < \end{align}
1430 < Then, the inverse transform,
1417 > Since the associated operators of $\varphi _{\Delta t/2,F} $ and
1418 > $\circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\tau }$ commute, the composition order
1419 > inside $\varphi _{\Delta t/2,V}$ does not matter. Furthermore, the
1420 > kinetic energy can be separated to translational kinetic term, $T^t
1421 > (p)$, and rotational kinetic term, $T^r (\pi )$,
1422 > \begin{equation}
1423 > T(p,\pi ) =T^t (p) + T^r (\pi ).
1424 > \end{equation}
1425 > where $ T^t (p) = \frac{1}{2}p^T m^{ - 1} p $ and $T^r (\pi )$ is
1426 > defined by Eq.~\ref{introEquation:rotationalKineticRB}. Therefore,
1427 > the corresponding propagators are given by
1428 > \[
1429 > \varphi _{\Delta t,T}  = \varphi _{\Delta t,T^t }  \circ \varphi
1430 > _{\Delta t,T^r }.
1431 > \]
1432 > Finally, we obtain the overall symplectic propagators for freely
1433 > moving rigid bodies
1434 > \begin{eqnarray}
1435 > \varphi _{\Delta t}  &=& \varphi _{\Delta t/2,F}  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\tau }  \notag\\
1436 >  & & \circ \varphi _{\Delta t,T^t }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _1 }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _2 }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t,\pi _3 }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _2 }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _1 }  \notag\\
1437 >  & & \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\tau }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,F}  .
1438 > \label{introEquation:overallRBFlowMaps}
1439 > \end{eqnarray}
1440  
1441 < \begin{align}
1442 < m\ddot x &=  - \frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}} -
1441 > \section{\label{introSection:langevinDynamics}Langevin Dynamics}
1442 > As an alternative to newtonian dynamics, Langevin dynamics, which
1443 > mimics a simple heat bath with stochastic and dissipative forces,
1444 > has been applied in a variety of studies. This section will review
1445 > the theory of Langevin dynamics. A brief derivation of the generalized
1446 > Langevin equation will be given first. Following that, we will
1447 > discuss the physical meaning of the terms appearing in the equation.
1448 >
1449 > \subsection{\label{introSection:generalizedLangevinDynamics}Derivation of Generalized Langevin Equation}
1450 >
1451 > A harmonic bath model, in which an effective set of harmonic
1452 > oscillators are used to mimic the effect of a linearly responding
1453 > environment, has been widely used in quantum chemistry and
1454 > statistical mechanics. One of the successful applications of
1455 > Harmonic bath model is the derivation of the Generalized Langevin
1456 > Dynamics (GLE). Consider a system, in which the degree of
1457 > freedom $x$ is assumed to couple to the bath linearly, giving a
1458 > Hamiltonian of the form
1459 > \begin{equation}
1460 > H = \frac{{p^2 }}{{2m}} + U(x) + H_B  + \Delta U(x,x_1 , \ldots x_N)
1461 > \label{introEquation:bathGLE}.
1462 > \end{equation}
1463 > Here $p$ is a momentum conjugate to $x$, $m$ is the mass associated
1464 > with this degree of freedom, $H_B$ is a harmonic bath Hamiltonian,
1465 > \[
1466 > H_B  = \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{ {\frac{{p_\alpha ^2
1467 > }}{{2m_\alpha  }} + \frac{1}{2}m_\alpha  x_\alpha ^2 }
1468 > \right\}}
1469 > \]
1470 > where the index $\alpha$ runs over all the bath degrees of freedom,
1471 > $\omega _\alpha$ are the harmonic bath frequencies, $m_\alpha$ are
1472 > the harmonic bath masses, and $\Delta U$ is a bilinear system-bath
1473 > coupling,
1474 > \[
1475 > \Delta U =  - \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {g_\alpha  x_\alpha  x}
1476 > \]
1477 > where $g_\alpha$ are the coupling constants between the bath
1478 > coordinates ($x_ \alpha$) and the system coordinate ($x$).
1479 > Introducing
1480 > \[
1481 > W(x) = U(x) - \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\frac{{g_\alpha ^2
1482 > }}{{2m_\alpha  w_\alpha ^2 }}} x^2
1483 > \]
1484 > and combining the last two terms in Eq.~\ref{introEquation:bathGLE}, we may rewrite the Harmonic bath Hamiltonian as
1485 > \[
1486 > H = \frac{{p^2 }}{{2m}} + W(x) + \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N
1487 > {\left\{ {\frac{{p_\alpha ^2 }}{{2m_\alpha  }} + \frac{1}{2}m_\alpha
1488 > w_\alpha ^2 \left( {x_\alpha   - \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{m_\alpha
1489 > w_\alpha ^2 }}x} \right)^2 } \right\}}.
1490 > \]
1491 > Since the first two terms of the new Hamiltonian depend only on the
1492 > system coordinates, we can get the equations of motion for
1493 > Generalized Langevin Dynamics by Hamilton's equations,
1494 > \begin{equation}
1495 > m\ddot x =  - \frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}} -
1496 > \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {g_\alpha  \left( {x_\alpha   -
1497 > \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{m_\alpha  w_\alpha ^2 }}x} \right)},
1498 > \label{introEquation:coorMotionGLE}
1499 > \end{equation}
1500 > and
1501 > \begin{equation}
1502 > m\ddot x_\alpha   =  - m_\alpha  w_\alpha ^2 \left( {x_\alpha   -
1503 > \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{m_\alpha  w_\alpha ^2 }}x} \right).
1504 > \label{introEquation:bathMotionGLE}
1505 > \end{equation}
1506 > In order to derive an equation for $x$, the dynamics of the bath
1507 > variables $x_\alpha$ must be solved exactly first. As an integral
1508 > transform which is particularly useful in solving linear ordinary
1509 > differential equations,the Laplace transform is the appropriate tool
1510 > to solve this problem. The basic idea is to transform the difficult
1511 > differential equations into simple algebra problems which can be
1512 > solved easily. Then, by applying the inverse Laplace transform, we
1513 > can retrieve the solutions of the original problems. Let $f(t)$ be a
1514 > function defined on $ [0,\infty ) $, the Laplace transform of $f(t)$
1515 > is a new function defined as
1516 > \[
1517 > L(f(t)) \equiv F(p) = \int_0^\infty  {f(t)e^{ - pt} dt}
1518 > \]
1519 > where  $p$ is real and  $L$ is called the Laplace Transform
1520 > Operator. Below are some important properties of the Laplace transform
1521 > \begin{eqnarray*}
1522 > L(x + y)  & = & L(x) + L(y) \\
1523 > L(ax)     & = & aL(x) \\
1524 > L(\dot x) & = & pL(x) - px(0) \\
1525 > L(\ddot x)& = & p^2 L(x) - px(0) - \dot x(0) \\
1526 > L\left( {\int_0^t {g(t - \tau )h(\tau )d\tau } } \right)& = & G(p)H(p) \\
1527 > \end{eqnarray*}
1528 > Applying the Laplace transform to the bath coordinates, we obtain
1529 > \begin{eqnarray*}
1530 > p^2 L(x_\alpha  ) - px_\alpha  (0) - \dot x_\alpha  (0) & = & - \omega _\alpha ^2 L(x_\alpha  ) + \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{\omega _\alpha  }}L(x), \\
1531 > L(x_\alpha  ) & = & \frac{{\frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{\omega _\alpha  }}L(x) + px_\alpha  (0) + \dot x_\alpha  (0)}}{{p^2  + \omega _\alpha ^2 }}. \\
1532 > \end{eqnarray*}
1533 > In the same way, the system coordinates become
1534 > \begin{eqnarray*}
1535 > mL(\ddot x) & = &
1536 >  - \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{ { - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2 }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }}\frac{p}{{p^2  + \omega _\alpha ^2 }}pL(x) - \frac{p}{{p^2  + \omega _\alpha ^2 }}g_\alpha  x_\alpha  (0) - \frac{1}{{p^2  + \omega _\alpha ^2 }}g_\alpha  \dot x_\alpha  (0)} \right\}}  \\
1537 >  & & - \frac{1}{p}\frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}}.
1538 > \end{eqnarray*}
1539 > With the help of some relatively important inverse Laplace
1540 > transformations:
1541 > \[
1542 > \begin{array}{c}
1543 > L(\cos at) = \frac{p}{{p^2  + a^2 }} \\
1544 > L(\sin at) = \frac{a}{{p^2  + a^2 }} \\
1545 > L(1) = \frac{1}{p} \\
1546 > \end{array}
1547 > \]
1548 > we obtain
1549 > \begin{eqnarray*}
1550 > m\ddot x & =  & - \frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}} -
1551   \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{ {\left( { - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2
1552   }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }}} \right)\int_0^t {\cos (\omega
1553 < _\alpha  t)\dot x(t - \tau )d\tau  - \left[ {g_\alpha  x_\alpha  (0)
1554 < - \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha  }}} \right]\cos
1555 < (\omega _\alpha  t) - \frac{{g_\alpha  \dot x_\alpha  (0)}}{{\omega
1556 < _\alpha  }}\sin (\omega _\alpha  t)} } \right\}}
1553 > _\alpha  t)\dot x(t - \tau )d\tau } } \right\}}  \\
1554 > & & + \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{ {\left[ {g_\alpha
1555 > x_\alpha (0) - \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha  }}}
1556 > \right]\cos (\omega _\alpha  t) + \frac{{g_\alpha  \dot x_\alpha
1557 > (0)}}{{\omega _\alpha  }}\sin (\omega _\alpha  t)} \right\}}\\
1558   %
1559 < &= - \frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}} - \int_0^t
1560 < {\sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left( { - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2
1561 < }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }}} \right)\cos (\omega _\alpha
1562 < t)\dot x(t - \tau )d} \tau }  + \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{
1563 < {\left[ {g_\alpha  x_\alpha  (0) - \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{m_\alpha
1564 < \omega _\alpha  }}} \right]\cos (\omega _\alpha  t) +
1565 < \frac{{g_\alpha  \dot x_\alpha  (0)}}{{\omega _\alpha  }}\sin
1566 < (\omega _\alpha  t)} \right\}}
1567 < \end{align}
1568 <
1559 > & = & -
1560 > \frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}} - \int_0^t {\sum\limits_{\alpha
1561 > = 1}^N {\left( { - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2 }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha
1562 > ^2 }}} \right)\cos (\omega _\alpha
1563 > t)\dot x(t - \tau )d} \tau }  \\
1564 > & & + \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{ {\left[ {g_\alpha
1565 > x_\alpha (0) - \frac{{g_\alpha }}{{m_\alpha \omega _\alpha  }}}
1566 > \right]\cos (\omega _\alpha  t) + \frac{{g_\alpha  \dot x_\alpha
1567 > (0)}}{{\omega _\alpha  }}\sin (\omega _\alpha  t)} \right\}}
1568 > \end{eqnarray*}
1569 > Introducing a \emph{dynamic friction kernel}
1570   \begin{equation}
1571 + \xi (t) = \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left( { - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2
1572 + }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }}} \right)\cos (\omega _\alpha  t)}
1573 + \label{introEquation:dynamicFrictionKernelDefinition}
1574 + \end{equation}
1575 + and \emph{a random force}
1576 + \begin{equation}
1577 + R(t) = \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left( {g_\alpha  x_\alpha  (0)
1578 + - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2 }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }}x(0)}
1579 + \right)\cos (\omega _\alpha  t)}  + \frac{{\dot x_\alpha
1580 + (0)}}{{\omega _\alpha  }}\sin (\omega _\alpha  t),
1581 + \label{introEquation:randomForceDefinition}
1582 + \end{equation}
1583 + the equation of motion can be rewritten as
1584 + \begin{equation}
1585   m\ddot x =  - \frac{{\partial W}}{{\partial x}} - \int_0^t {\xi
1586   (t)\dot x(t - \tau )d\tau }  + R(t)
1587   \label{introEuqation:GeneralizedLangevinDynamics}
1588   \end{equation}
1589 < %where $ {\xi (t)}$ is friction kernel, $R(t)$ is random force and
1590 < %$W$ is the potential of mean force. $W(x) =  - kT\ln p(x)$
1589 > which is known as the \emph{generalized Langevin equation} (GLE).
1590 >
1591 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:randomForceDynamicFrictionKernel}\textbf{Random Force and Dynamic Friction Kernel}}
1592 >
1593 > One may notice that $R(t)$ depends only on initial conditions, which
1594 > implies it is completely deterministic within the context of a
1595 > harmonic bath. However, it is easy to verify that $R(t)$ is totally
1596 > uncorrelated to $x$ and $\dot x$, $\left\langle {x(t)R(t)}
1597 > \right\rangle  = 0, \left\langle {\dot x(t)R(t)} \right\rangle  =
1598 > 0.$ This property is what we expect from a truly random process. As
1599 > long as the model chosen for $R(t)$ was a gaussian distribution in
1600 > general, the stochastic nature of the GLE still remains.
1601 > %dynamic friction kernel
1602 > The convolution integral
1603   \[
1604 < \xi (t) = \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left( { - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2
1154 < }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }}} \right)\cos (\omega _\alpha  t)}
1604 > \int_0^t {\xi (t)\dot x(t - \tau )d\tau }
1605   \]
1606 < For an infinite harmonic bath, we can use the spectral density and
1607 < an integral over frequencies.
1608 <
1606 > depends on the entire history of the evolution of $x$, which implies
1607 > that the bath retains memory of previous motions. In other words,
1608 > the bath requires a finite time to respond to change in the motion
1609 > of the system. For a sluggish bath which responds slowly to changes
1610 > in the system coordinate, we may regard $\xi(t)$ as a constant
1611 > $\xi(t) = \Xi_0$. Hence, the convolution integral becomes
1612   \[
1613 < R(t) = \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left( {g_\alpha  x_\alpha  (0)
1161 < - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2 }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }}x(0)}
1162 < \right)\cos (\omega _\alpha  t)}  + \frac{{\dot x_\alpha
1163 < (0)}}{{\omega _\alpha  }}\sin (\omega _\alpha  t)
1613 > \int_0^t {\xi (t)\dot x(t - \tau )d\tau }  = \xi _0 (x(t) - x(0))
1614   \]
1615 < The random forces depend only on initial conditions.
1166 <
1167 < \subsubsection{\label{introSection:secondFluctuationDissipation}The Second Fluctuation Dissipation Theorem}
1168 < So we can define a new set of coordinates,
1615 > and Eq.~\ref{introEuqation:GeneralizedLangevinDynamics} becomes
1616   \[
1617 < q_\alpha  (t) = x_\alpha  (t) - \frac{1}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha
1618 < ^2 }}x(0)
1617 > m\ddot x =  - \frac{\partial }{{\partial x}}\left( {W(x) +
1618 > \frac{1}{2}\xi _0 (x - x_0 )^2 } \right) + R(t),
1619   \]
1620 < This makes
1620 > which can be used to describe the effect of dynamic caging in
1621 > viscous solvents. The other extreme is the bath that responds
1622 > infinitely quickly to motions in the system. Thus, $\xi (t)$ can be
1623 > taken as a $delta$ function in time:
1624   \[
1625 < R(t) = \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {g_\alpha  q_\alpha  (t)}
1625 > \xi (t) = 2\xi _0 \delta (t).
1626   \]
1627 < And since the $q$ coordinates are harmonic oscillators,
1627 > Hence, the convolution integral becomes
1628   \[
1629 < \begin{array}{l}
1630 < \left\langle {q_\alpha  (t)q_\alpha  (0)} \right\rangle  = \left\langle {q_\alpha ^2 (0)} \right\rangle \cos (\omega _\alpha  t) \\
1181 < \left\langle {q_\alpha  (t)q_\beta  (0)} \right\rangle  = \delta _{\alpha \beta } \left\langle {q_\alpha  (t)q_\alpha  (0)} \right\rangle  \\
1182 < \end{array}
1629 > \int_0^t {\xi (t)\dot x(t - \tau )d\tau }  = 2\xi _0 \int_0^t
1630 > {\delta (t)\dot x(t - \tau )d\tau }  = \xi _0 \dot x(t),
1631   \]
1632 + and Eq.~\ref{introEuqation:GeneralizedLangevinDynamics} becomes
1633 + \begin{equation}
1634 + m\ddot x =  - \frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}} - \xi _0 \dot
1635 + x(t) + R(t) \label{introEquation:LangevinEquation}
1636 + \end{equation}
1637 + which is known as the Langevin equation. The static friction
1638 + coefficient $\xi _0$ can either be calculated from spectral density
1639 + or be determined by Stokes' law for regular shaped particles. A
1640 + brief review on calculating friction tensors for arbitrary shaped
1641 + particles is given in Sec.~\ref{introSection:frictionTensor}.
1642  
1643 < \begin{align}
1186 < \left\langle {R(t)R(0)} \right\rangle  &= \sum\limits_\alpha
1187 < {\sum\limits_\beta  {g_\alpha  g_\beta  \left\langle {q_\alpha
1188 < (t)q_\beta  (0)} \right\rangle } }
1189 < %
1190 < &= \sum\limits_\alpha  {g_\alpha ^2 \left\langle {q_\alpha ^2 (0)}
1191 < \right\rangle \cos (\omega _\alpha  t)}
1192 < %
1193 < &= kT\xi (t)
1194 < \end{align}
1643 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:secondFluctuationDissipation}\textbf{The Second Fluctuation Dissipation Theorem}}
1644  
1645 + Defining a new set of coordinates
1646 + \[
1647 + q_\alpha  (t) = x_\alpha  (t) - \frac{1}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha
1648 + ^2 }}x(0),
1649 + \]
1650 + we can rewrite $R(t)$ as
1651 + \[
1652 + R(t) = \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {g_\alpha  q_\alpha  (t)}.
1653 + \]
1654 + And since the $q$ coordinates are harmonic oscillators,
1655 + \begin{eqnarray*}
1656 + \left\langle {q_\alpha ^2 } \right\rangle  & = & \frac{{kT}}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }} \\
1657 + \left\langle {q_\alpha  (t)q_\alpha  (0)} \right\rangle & = & \left\langle {q_\alpha ^2 (0)} \right\rangle \cos (\omega _\alpha  t) \\
1658 + \left\langle {q_\alpha  (t)q_\beta  (0)} \right\rangle & = &\delta _{\alpha \beta } \left\langle {q_\alpha  (t)q_\alpha  (0)} \right\rangle  \\
1659 + \left\langle {R(t)R(0)} \right\rangle & = & \sum\limits_\alpha  {\sum\limits_\beta  {g_\alpha  g_\beta  \left\langle {q_\alpha  (t)q_\beta  (0)} \right\rangle } }  \\
1660 +  & = &\sum\limits_\alpha  {g_\alpha ^2 \left\langle {q_\alpha ^2 (0)} \right\rangle \cos (\omega _\alpha  t)}  \\
1661 +  & = &kT\xi (t)
1662 + \end{eqnarray*}
1663 + Thus, we recover the \emph{second fluctuation dissipation theorem}
1664   \begin{equation}
1665   \xi (t) = \left\langle {R(t)R(0)} \right\rangle
1666 < \label{introEquation:secondFluctuationDissipation}
1666 > \label{introEquation:secondFluctuationDissipation},
1667   \end{equation}
1668 <
1669 < \section{\label{introSection:hydroynamics}Hydrodynamics}
1202 <
1203 < \subsection{\label{introSection:frictionTensor} Friction Tensor}
1204 < \subsection{\label{introSection:analyticalApproach}Analytical
1205 < Approach}
1206 <
1207 < \subsection{\label{introSection:approximationApproach}Approximation
1208 < Approach}
1209 <
1210 < \subsection{\label{introSection:centersRigidBody}Centers of Rigid
1211 < Body}
1212 <
1213 < \section{\label{introSection:correlationFunctions}Correlation Functions}
1668 > which acts as a constraint on the possible ways in which one can
1669 > model the random force and friction kernel.

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines