[gmx-developers] [Fwd: coulomb SR in 3.3cvs]
Michel Cuendet
michel.cuendet at epfl.ch
Thu Aug 4 18:46:37 CEST 2005
Hi guys,
Are there any news about that issue (see below my original message to this list)?
I've been trying to figure out what could in theory cause a relaxation of the
coulomb SR energy in 3.3.a lower than in 3.2.1. It could be something with the
constraints (I constrain all bonds involving hydrogens) ?
By minimizing with 321 and subsequently with 33a, I see the same kind of energy
difference as reported below. But there is no big apprarent movement. RMSD's
between the two conformations are of the order of 0.0005 nm for the protein, and
0.0015 for the water, uniformly spread over atom numbers except for a few
molecules jumping the cell boundary...
I would really like to know if 3.3.a is usable or not...
Thanks to anyone commenting on that issue,
Michel
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: coulomb SR in 3.3cvs
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 17:34:42 +0200
From: Michel Cuendet <michel.cuendet at epfl.ch>
Reply-To: michel.cuendet at epfl.ch
To: gmx-users at gromacs.org
References: <20050711100013.A17C62509A at xray.bmc.uu.se>
Hi,
I compiled the 3.3 CVS version of 27.05.2005 on itanium2 with the intel
8.1 compiler. (for those who don't know, the cvs version brings a
terrific speedup on itaniums). Tests were performed with both versions
in double precision, and were reproduced on an athlon platform.
I compared the different energies obtained with 3.2.1 and 3.3, by taking
the same trr (from a 3.2.1 equilibration, 85000 atoms, PME) and running
it with both versions for about 12ps. From the tables below, one sees
that there is a gap between Coulomb (SR) of 3450 KJ/mol, and between
potential energies of 3280 KJ/mol.
A close inspection of the energy files reveals that the version 3.3
reproduces the same energy as 3.2.1 at the first step, but the system
relaxes very quickly (0.5ps) to a lower energy with 3.3.
Rerunning with 3.3 the trajectory produced by 3.2.1 surprisingly gives
the correct energies.
Any explaination for that ?
Thanks,
Michel
3.2.1 :
Energy Average RMSD Fluct. Drift Tot-Drift
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G96Bond 6723.8 140.873 138.612 -6.69756 -87.0817
G96Angle 10213.6 173.746 173.579 2.02771 26.3642
Proper Dih. 4446.16 89.4129 84.2042 8.01199 104.172
Improper Dih. 3264.55 78.886 78.3318 -2.48685 -32.334
LJ-14 852.608 79.621 79.52 1.0681 13.8874
Coulomb-14 62903.9 126.041 122.079 -8.35397 -108.618
LJ (SR) 166906 1099.22 1099.1 -4.19132 -54.4955
Coulomb (SR) -1.2043e+06 1629.38 1629.34 -3.3074 -43.0028
Coulomb (LR) -188686 91.952 90.6651 4.08445 53.106
Potential -1.13768e+06 1031.78 1031.12 -9.84429 -127.995
3.3 CVS
Energy Average RMSD Fluct. Drift Tot-Drift
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G96Bond 6486.57 122.559 120.492 -7.32269 -77.6351
G96Angle 10003.9 152.062 152.054 -0.496268 -5.26144
Proper Dih. 4391.87 83.2508 80.8574 6.47554 68.6537
Improper Dih. 3194.22 78.6896 78.6495 0.819815 8.69168
LJ-14 833.553 76.0076 75.8776 -1.45206 -15.3947
Coulomb-14 62899 124.539 123.82 -4.36711 -46.3001
LJ (SR) 167720 1182.33 1157.55 78.6782 834.146
Coulomb (SR) -1.20775e+06 1897.76 1850.85 -137.014 -1452.62
Coul. recip. -188746 100.09 100.079 0.48938 5.18841
Potential -1.14096e+06 1149.25 1132.33 -64.1897 -680.539
--
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Michel Cuendet, Ph.D. student
Laboratory of Computational Biochemistry and Chemistry
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne (EPFL)
CH-1015 Lausanne
Switzerland Phone : +41 21 693 0324
lcbcpc21.epfl.ch/~mitch +41 1 633 4194
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
More information about the gromacs.org_gmx-developers
mailing list