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

Comparing trunk/tengDissertation/Methodology.tex (file contents):
Revision 2729 by tim, Mon Apr 24 18:49:04 2006 UTC vs.
Revision 2801 by tim, Tue Jun 6 14:56:36 2006 UTC

# Line 4 | Line 4 | methods have been developed to generate statistical en
4  
5   In order to mimic the experiments, which are usually performed under
6   constant temperature and/or pressure, extended Hamiltonian system
7 < methods have been developed to generate statistical ensemble, such
7 > methods have been developed to generate statistical ensembles, such
8   as canonical ensemble and isobaric-isothermal ensemble \textit{etc}.
9   In addition to the standard ensemble, specific ensembles have been
10   developed to account for the anisotropy between the lateral and
# Line 150 | Line 150 | from the true energy baseline for clarity.} \label{tim
150   increasing time step. For each time step, the dotted line is total
151   energy using the DLM integrator, and the solid line comes from the
152   quaternion integrator. The larger time step plots are shifted up
153 < from the true energy baseline for clarity.} \label{timestep}
153 > from the true energy baseline for clarity.}
154 > \label{methodFig:timestep}
155   \end{figure}
156  
157 < In Fig.~\ref{timestep}, the resulting energy drift at various time
158 < steps for both the DLM and quaternion integration schemes is
159 < compared. All of the 1000 molecule water simulations started with
160 < the same configuration, and the only difference was the method for
161 < handling rotational motion. At time steps of 0.1 and 0.5 fs, both
162 < methods for propagating molecule rotation conserve energy fairly
163 < well, with the quaternion method showing a slight energy drift over
164 < time in the 0.5 fs time step simulation. At time steps of 1 and 2
165 < fs, the energy conservation benefits of the DLM method are clearly
166 < demonstrated. Thus, while maintaining the same degree of energy
167 < conservation, one can take considerably longer time steps, leading
168 < to an overall reduction in computation time.
157 > In Fig.~\ref{methodFig:timestep}, the resulting energy drift at
158 > various time steps for both the DLM and quaternion integration
159 > schemes is compared. All of the 1000 molecule water simulations
160 > started with the same configuration, and the only difference was the
161 > method for handling rotational motion. At time steps of 0.1 and 0.5
162 > fs, both methods for propagating molecule rotation conserve energy
163 > fairly well, with the quaternion method showing a slight energy
164 > drift over time in the 0.5 fs time step simulation. At time steps of
165 > 1 and 2 fs, the energy conservation benefits of the DLM method are
166 > clearly demonstrated. Thus, while maintaining the same degree of
167 > energy conservation, one can take considerably longer time steps,
168 > leading to an overall reduction in computation time.
169  
170   \subsection{\label{methodSection:NVT}Nos\'{e}-Hoover Thermostatting}
171  
172 < The Nos\'e-Hoover equations of motion are given by\cite{Hoover85}
172 > The Nos\'e-Hoover equations of motion are given by\cite{Hoover1985}
173   \begin{eqnarray}
174   \dot{{\bf r}} & = & {\bf v}, \\
175   \dot{{\bf v}} & = & \frac{{\bf f}}{m} - \chi {\bf v} ,\\
# Line 284 | Line 285 | Helmholtz free energy,\cite{melchionna93}
285  
286   The Nos\'e-Hoover algorithm is known to conserve a Hamiltonian for
287   the extended system that is, to within a constant, identical to the
288 < Helmholtz free energy,\cite{melchionna93}
288 > Helmholtz free energy,\cite{Melchionna1993}
289   \begin{equation}
290   H_{\mathrm{NVT}} = V + K + f k_B T_{\mathrm{target}} \left(
291   \frac{\tau_{T}^2 \chi^2(t)}{2} + \int_{0}^{t} \chi(t^\prime)
# Line 295 | Line 296 | Bond constraints are applied at the end of both the {\
296   last column of the {\tt .stat} file to allow checks on the quality
297   of the integration.
298  
298 Bond constraints are applied at the end of both the {\tt moveA} and
299 {\tt moveB} portions of the algorithm.  Details on the constraint
300 algorithms are given in section \ref{oopseSec:rattle}.
301
299   \subsection{\label{methodSection:NPTi}Constant-pressure integration with
300   isotropic box deformations (NPTi)}
301  
302   To carry out isobaric-isothermal ensemble calculations {\sc oopse}
303   implements the Melchionna modifications to the
304 < Nos\'e-Hoover-Andersen equations of motion,\cite{melchionna93}
304 > Nos\'e-Hoover-Andersen equations of motion,\cite{Melchionna1993}
305  
306   \begin{eqnarray}
307   \dot{{\bf r}} & = & {\bf v} + \eta \left( {\bf r} - {\bf R}_0 \right), \\
# Line 609 | Line 606 | assume non-orthorhombic geometries.
606   finds most use in simulating crystals or liquid crystals which
607   assume non-orthorhombic geometries.
608  
609 < \subsection{\label{methodSection:NPAT}Constant Lateral Pressure and Constant Surface Area (NPAT)}
613 <
614 < \subsection{\label{methodSection:NPrT}Constant lateral Pressure and Constant Surface Tension (NP\gamma T) }
609 > \subsection{\label{methodSection:otherSpecialEnsembles}Other Special Ensembles}
610  
611 < \subsection{\label{methodSection:NPTxyz}Constant pressure in 3 axes (NPTxyz)}
611 > \subsubsection{\label{methodSection:NPAT}NPAT Ensemble}
612  
613 < There is one additional extended system integrator which is somewhat
614 < simpler than the NPTf method described above.  In this case, the
615 < three axes have independent barostats which each attempt to preserve
616 < the target pressure along the box walls perpendicular to that
617 < particular axis.  The lengths of the box axes are allowed to
618 < fluctuate independently, but the angle between the box axes does not
619 < change. The equations of motion are identical to those described
620 < above, but only the {\it diagonal} elements of
621 < $\overleftrightarrow{\eta}$ are computed.  The off-diagonal elements
622 < are set to zero (even when the pressure tensor has non-zero
623 < off-diagonal elements). It should be noted that the NPTxyz
624 < integrator is a special case of $NP\gamma T$ if the surface tension
625 < $\gamma$ is set to zero.
613 > A comprehensive understanding of structure¨Cfunction relations of
614 > biological membrane system ultimately relies on structure and
615 > dynamics of lipid bilayer, which are strongly affected by the
616 > interfacial interaction between lipid molecules and surrounding
617 > media. One quantity to describe the interfacial interaction is so
618 > called the average surface area per lipid. Constat area and constant
619 > lateral pressure simulation can be achieved by extending the
620 > standard NPT ensemble with a different pressure control strategy
621 >
622 > \begin{equation}
623 > \dot {\overleftrightarrow{\eta}} _{\alpha \beta}=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
624 >                  \frac{{V(P_{\alpha \beta }  - P_{{\rm{target}}} )}}{{\tau_{\rm{B}}^{\rm{2}} fk_B T_{{\rm{target}}} }}
625 >                  & \mbox{if $ \alpha = \beta  = z$}\\
626 >                  0 & \mbox{otherwise}\\
627 >           \end{array}
628 >    \right.
629 > \end{equation}
630  
631 + Note that the iterative schemes for NPAT are identical to those
632 + described for the NPTi integrator.
633  
634 < \section{\label{methodSection:constraintMethods}Constraint Methods}
634 > \subsubsection{\label{methodSection:NPrT}NP$\gamma$T Ensemble}
635  
636 < \subsection{\label{methodSection:rattle}The {\sc rattle} Method for Bond
637 <    Constraints}
638 <
639 < \subsection{\label{methodSection:zcons}Z-Constraint Method}
640 <
641 < Based on the fluctuation-dissipation theorem, a force
642 < auto-correlation method was developed by Roux and Karplus to
643 < investigate the dynamics of ions inside ion channels.\cite{Roux91}
644 < The time-dependent friction coefficient can be calculated from the
645 < deviation of the instantaneous force from its mean force.
636 > Theoretically, the surface tension $\gamma$ of a stress free
637 > membrane system should be zero since its surface free energy $G$ is
638 > minimum with respect to surface area $A$
639 > \[
640 > \gamma  = \frac{{\partial G}}{{\partial A}}.
641 > \]
642 > However, a surface tension of zero is not appropriate for relatively
643 > small patches of membrane. In order to eliminate the edge effect of
644 > the membrane simulation, a special ensemble, NP$\gamma$T, is
645 > proposed to maintain the lateral surface tension and normal
646 > pressure. The equation of motion for cell size control tensor,
647 > $\eta$, in $NP\gamma T$ is
648   \begin{equation}
649 < \xi(z,t)=\langle\delta F(z,t)\delta F(z,0)\rangle/k_{B}T,
650 < \end{equation}
651 < where%
652 < \begin{equation}
653 < \delta F(z,t)=F(z,t)-\langle F(z,t)\rangle.
649 > \dot {\overleftrightarrow{\eta}} _{\alpha \beta}=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
650 >    - A_{xy} (\gamma _\alpha   - \gamma _{{\rm{target}}} ) & \mbox{$\alpha  = \beta  = x$ or $\alpha  = \beta  = y$}\\
651 >    \frac{{V(P_{\alpha \beta }  - P_{{\rm{target}}} )}}{{\tau _{\rm{B}}^{\rm{2}} fk_B T_{{\rm{target}}}}} & \mbox{$\alpha  = \beta  = z$} \\
652 >    0 & \mbox{$\alpha  \ne \beta$} \\
653 >       \end{array}
654 >    \right.
655   \end{equation}
656 <
657 < If the time-dependent friction decays rapidly, the static friction
654 < coefficient can be approximated by
656 > where $ \gamma _{{\rm{target}}}$ is the external surface tension and
657 > the instantaneous surface tensor $\gamma _\alpha$ is given by
658   \begin{equation}
659 < \xi_{\text{static}}(z)=\int_{0}^{\infty}\langle\delta F(z,t)\delta
660 < F(z,0)\rangle dt.
659 > \gamma _\alpha   =  - h_z( \overleftrightarrow{P} _{\alpha \alpha }
660 > - P_{{\rm{target}}} )
661 > \label{methodEquation:instantaneousSurfaceTensor}
662   \end{equation}
659 Allowing diffusion constant to then be calculated through the
660 Einstein relation:\cite{Marrink94}
661 \begin{equation}
662 D(z)=\frac{k_{B}T}{\xi_{\text{static}}(z)}=\frac{(k_{B}T)^{2}}{\int_{0}^{\infty
663 }\langle\delta F(z,t)\delta F(z,0)\rangle dt}.%
664 \end{equation}
663  
664 < The Z-Constraint method, which fixes the z coordinates of the
665 < molecules with respect to the center of the mass of the system, has
666 < been a method suggested to obtain the forces required for the force
667 < auto-correlation calculation.\cite{Marrink94} However, simply
668 < resetting the coordinate will move the center of the mass of the
669 < whole system. To avoid this problem, a new method was used in {\sc
670 < oopse}. Instead of resetting the coordinate, we reset the forces of
673 < z-constrained molecules as well as subtract the total constraint
674 < forces from the rest of the system after the force calculation at
675 < each time step.
664 > There is one additional extended system integrator (NPTxyz), in
665 > which each attempt to preserve the target pressure along the box
666 > walls perpendicular to that particular axis.  The lengths of the box
667 > axes are allowed to fluctuate independently, but the angle between
668 > the box axes does not change. It should be noted that the NPTxyz
669 > integrator is a special case of $NP\gamma T$ if the surface tension
670 > $\gamma$ is set to zero.
671  
672 < After the force calculation, define $G_\alpha$ as
678 < \begin{equation}
679 < G_{\alpha} = \sum_i F_{\alpha i}, \label{oopseEq:zc1}
680 < \end{equation}
681 < where $F_{\alpha i}$ is the force in the z direction of atom $i$ in
682 < z-constrained molecule $\alpha$. The forces of the z constrained
683 < molecule are then set to:
684 < \begin{equation}
685 < F_{\alpha i} = F_{\alpha i} -
686 <    \frac{m_{\alpha i} G_{\alpha}}{\sum_i m_{\alpha i}}.
687 < \end{equation}
688 < Here, $m_{\alpha i}$ is the mass of atom $i$ in the z-constrained
689 < molecule. Having rescaled the forces, the velocities must also be
690 < rescaled to subtract out any center of mass velocity in the z
691 < direction.
692 < \begin{equation}
693 < v_{\alpha i} = v_{\alpha i} -
694 <    \frac{\sum_i m_{\alpha i} v_{\alpha i}}{\sum_i m_{\alpha i}},
695 < \end{equation}
696 < where $v_{\alpha i}$ is the velocity of atom $i$ in the z direction.
697 < Lastly, all of the accumulated z constrained forces must be
698 < subtracted from the system to keep the system center of mass from
699 < drifting.
700 < \begin{equation}
701 < F_{\beta i} = F_{\beta i} - \frac{m_{\beta i} \sum_{\alpha}
702 < G_{\alpha}}
703 <    {\sum_{\beta}\sum_i m_{\beta i}},
704 < \end{equation}
705 < where $\beta$ are all of the unconstrained molecules in the system.
706 < Similarly, the velocities of the unconstrained molecules must also
707 < be scaled.
708 < \begin{equation}
709 < v_{\beta i} = v_{\beta i} + \sum_{\alpha}
710 <    \frac{\sum_i m_{\alpha i} v_{\alpha i}}{\sum_i m_{\alpha i}}.
711 < \end{equation}
672 > %\section{\label{methodSection:constraintMethod}Constraint Method}
673  
674 < At the very beginning of the simulation, the molecules may not be at
714 < their constrained positions. To move a z-constrained molecule to its
715 < specified position, a simple harmonic potential is used
716 < \begin{equation}
717 < U(t)=\frac{1}{2}k_{\text{Harmonic}}(z(t)-z_{\text{cons}})^{2},%
718 < \end{equation}
719 < where $k_{\text{Harmonic}}$ is the harmonic force constant, $z(t)$
720 < is the current $z$ coordinate of the center of mass of the
721 < constrained molecule, and $z_{\text{cons}}$ is the constrained
722 < position. The harmonic force operating on the z-constrained molecule
723 < at time $t$ can be calculated by
724 < \begin{equation}
725 < F_{z_{\text{Harmonic}}}(t)=-\frac{\partial U(t)}{\partial z(t)}=
726 <    -k_{\text{Harmonic}}(z(t)-z_{\text{cons}}).
727 < \end{equation}
674 > %\subsection{\label{methodSection:bondConstraint}Bond Constraint for Rigid Body}
675  
676 + %\subsection{\label{methodSection:zcons}Z-constraint Method}
677 +
678   \section{\label{methodSection:langevin}Integrators for Langevin Dynamics of Rigid Bodies}
679  
680   \subsection{\label{methodSection:temperature}Temperature Control}

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines