[gmx-developers] QMMM, exclusions and neighbor search

hess at sbc.su.se hess at sbc.su.se
Mon Mar 8 13:18:03 CET 2010 

Hi,

I think that we need two warnings in grompp when you have multiple
molecule types with qm atoms.
One when you do not use energygroup exclusions
and a second want even if you do, but you use PME.

Berk

> hess at sbc.su.se wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Gerrit, are you sure?
>> Did 3.3 really not add exclusions between qm atoms in different
>> molecules?
>>
> It did. Maybe I did not make that clear. I had not realized this problem
> in 4 onward, because I always use one topology file. Even water I
> include explicitly.
>
>> Anyhow, with PME this still would not be correct.
>> The PME exclusion forces are determined as erf(beta*r)/r,
>> which is accurate at short distance, but quite wrong at a distance
>> of half the box length.
>>
> In QM/MM the Coulomb expression is used. Therefore, the use of ewald is
> not recommended and I still use cutoff. The ONIOM based QM/MM, all
> interactions between the subsystems are evaluated at the MM level, so
> Ewald can be used.
>
>> Only doing an extra mesh calculation would fix this.
>> I am currently considering if that would be worth implementing.
>  The long range interaction between the QM subsystems in different boxes
> can be effectively done by using partial charges on the QM atoms and
> evaluating these interactions in the MM part. The charges can be fitted
> after the wavefuntion has been evaluated. However, what is missing is
> then the effect of the periodic images on the computations of the QM
> energy and charges. I have not found a satisfactory solution for this,
> although they must be out there already.
>> Berk
>>
>>
>>> Hi Pia,
>>>
>>> It has indeed always been like this. Therefore, the fix of incuding the
>>> QM atoms in the energy group exclusions will have the same effect as
>>> explicitly removing the interactions.
>>>
>>>
>>> Gerrit
>>>
>>>
>>> Pia Toelle wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Berk.
>>>>
>>>> It just came to my mind, that there are already some QM-QM
>>>> interactions
>>>> excluded in the code. (My first remark in July 2009 was, that ONLY the
>>>> nonbonded interaction of QM atoms belonging to the SAME molecule
>>>> (Gromacs 4.x.x).)
>>>>
>>>> So what about the "original" Gromacs 4.0.5 code and the use of QM/MM
>>>> and
>>>> PME? And the Gromacs 3.x.x code where QM-nonbonded interaction has
>>>> also
>>>>  been excluded as far as I remember.
>>>>
>>>> Pia
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Pia Toelle wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hi.
>>>>>
>>>>> So what's about my idea just to set the QM-QM interaction in
>>>>> "sys->ffparams" (in topio.c) to zero by including special
>>>>> QM-atomtypes.
>>>>> Do you see any problem there? For me it seems to work.
>>>>>
>>>>> Pia
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Berk Hess wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With PME you can not easily exclude Coulomb interactions between
>>>>>> atom
>>>>>> pairs that come from
>>>>>> the PME mesh part. You would need one or multiple (I don't recall
>>>>>> now)
>>>>>> extra mesh calculations
>>>>>> to do that. It can be done, but requires some coding effort.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Berk
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pia Toelle wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Actually, we are using PME (and our QM-calculation also uses pbc
>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>> Ewald summation). What problem do you refer to?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>>> Pia
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Berk Hess wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I suggested a simple solution for this problem to Gerrit, which
>>>>>>>> does
>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>> require code changes,
>>>>>>>> except for a check in grompp.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think you can simply use energy group exclusions by putting all
>>>>>>>> the qm
>>>>>>>> atoms in a separate
>>>>>>>> energy group and using: energygrp_excl = qm qm
>>>>>>>> This should do what you want, except when using PME and to a
>>>>>>>> certain
>>>>>>>> extent also reaction field.
>>>>>>>> But for those methods it is quite complicated to come up with a
>>>>>>>> proper
>>>>>>>> scheme.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Berk
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Pia Toelle wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Gerrit.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I made the following changes in  src/kernel/topio.c:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - "generate_qmexcl": "molblock" filling changed (I am not sure,
>>>>>>>>> if
>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>> was related to the QM-QM interaction problem)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - added "generate_qm_atom_type": new QM-atomtype for all
>>>>>>>>> atomtypes
>>>>>>>>> added
>>>>>>>>>  ( sys->atomtypes.nr were doubled)
>>>>>>>>> The added QM-atomtypes have zeros in sys->ffparams for the QM-QM
>>>>>>>>> non-bonded interaction.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I hope, that the changes in the attached file topio.c are
>>>>>>>>> understandable
>>>>>>>>> and that it will help you.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Greetings,
>>>>>>>>> Pia
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Gerrit Groenhof wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hallo Pia,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sorry for not getting back on this issue earlier.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Have you been able to fix this bug?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> BEst wishes,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Gerrit
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 11 Aug 2009, at 13:10, Pia Toelle wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Okay.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for your reply. I will try to do so.
>>>>>>>>>>> Please, tell me if their are any news concerning this problem.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>> Pia
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Berk Hess wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> That would work.
>>>>>>>>>>>> But we should certainly fix the code.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not think of this situation when introducing the moltype
>>>>>>>>>>>> data
>>>>>>>>>>>> structure in version 4.0.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Berk
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Pia Toelle wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To avoid a different handling of QM-atoms of different
>>>>>>>>>>>>> molecule
>>>>>>>>>>>>> types,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> would it be possible to put all QM atoms in one molblock and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> moltype, as
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the molblocks ans moltypes are filled and defined anyway in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> generate_qmexcl? Or would this influence other parts of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> program?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> greetings
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pia
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gerrit Groenhof wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I had not realized your previous question had not been
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> answered
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> completely, sorry.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In 3.3 it was a bit more intuitive, also for me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In the generate_qmexcl there is a loop over all molblocks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thus all qm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> atoms are found, even if they are in different molecules.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might have a point that between molecules the qm atoms do
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seem to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get excluded. Such situation could happen, for example if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> part
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> protein and a few waters are treated at the QM level, which
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> typical
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for enzymes. To avoid problems (if any), you can include
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> such
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> waters in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the .itp file of the protein.  But it should work also with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different QM atom in different topologies and I will  look
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into this .
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gerrit
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10 Aug 2009, at 18:27, Pia Toelle wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I still have problems with "generate_qmexcl" in version
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4.0.5.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Comparing to earlier version 3.3.3, one notices that the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> data
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> structure
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> moltype and molblock are included. In the earlier version,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> qm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exclusions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were generated for each QM-atom inside the system, now in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version 4.0.5,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they are generated per atom inside each molecule type.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I still wounder whether the exclusions between QM-atoms of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> molecule types are considered here and - if yes - how. Or -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if not -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where this is done.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is the splitting of the QM part into molblock's correct?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would be glad for any comment or reply! Please tell me if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> my question
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is not precise.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pia
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pia Toelle wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello Gerrit.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the reply, it helped a lot, but I still have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problems to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understand.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As far as I understood in "generate_qmexcl" the QM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> molecules
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are put
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into separate molblock and each molecule has its own
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> moleculetype.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then "generate_qmexcl_moltype" is called and the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exclusions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are set.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> At first an array "qm_arr" is generated. As the loop
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "for(i=0;i<molt->atoms.nr;i++)" only passes through the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> atoms with the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> same moleculetype.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "sys->moltype[--].excls" contains the exclusions between
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Atoms of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> same topologie.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are the nonbonded interactions listed in the ilist and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> excluded by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deleting them in this list?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is the ilist generated in first place?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please correct my estimates.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pia
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gerrit Groenhof wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The QM - QM interactions, both Coulomb and van der Waals
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are explicitly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exluded.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The code for this begins with the comment
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /* creating the exclusion block for the QM atoms. Each QM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> atom has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  * as excluded elements all the other QMatoms (and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> itself).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  */
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In generate_qmexcl_moltype (topio.c).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thus the exclusionlists are expanded with all QM- QM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interactions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The coulomb interactions are handled a bit more dirty: In
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> initialisation (qmmm.c), these charges are put to zero.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thus the standard nbsearching will look at the exclusions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and check
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particle is charged. This way it will never include the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> QM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> QM  atom
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pairs, or QM MM coulomb interactions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The QMMM nbsearching in the next step takes the QM atoms
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i-particles
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and searches all MM neighbours.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gerrit
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 15 Jul 2009, at 20:10, Pia Toelle wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (I am using Gromacs 4.0.5 (QM/MM))
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have a question about the exclusion of nonbonded
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (specially VdW)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interaction in QM/MM simulation. The coulomb and VdW
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interaction
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> two QM Atoms should not be calculated by Gromacs as the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> QM-QM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interaction is done by the QM-program.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where (and how) in the code is the VdW (and also
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coulomb)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interaction
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between two QM atoms excluded?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please also comment on the following:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (topio.c called by grompp.c)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "generate_qmexcl" and "generate_qmexcl_moltype", here
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exclusions for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the INTRA-molecular interaction are set. Is this right?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What is about
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Interaction between different QM-Molecules?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (ns.c)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In "search_neighbours" the "nsgrid_core" is called to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> set
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neighbor lists (for all atoms QM and MM !?), then it is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> called to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> set up
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the QM/MM neighbor list.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (force.c)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In "do_forces" the "do_force_lowlevel" is called, there
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> QM-calculation and "do_nonbonded" takes place. The later
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contain any information about the atom being QM or not,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> far as I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see. Therefore, I believe, that the decision to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> calculate
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> VdW was made
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by setting up the lists. Is this right???
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pia Tölle
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BCCMS, university of Bremen, Germany
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers at gromacs.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-developers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> www interface or send it to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers-request at gromacs.org.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gerrit Groenhof
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MPI biophysical chemistry
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Goettingen
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Germany
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://wwwuser.gwdg.de/~ggroenh/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers at gromacs.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-developers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thewww
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interface or send it to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers-request at gromacs.org.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers at gromacs.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-developers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> www interface or send it to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers-request at gromacs.org.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers at gromacs.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-developers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> www interface or send it to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers-request at gromacs.org.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gerrit Groenhof
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MPI biophysical chemistry
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Goettingen
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Germany
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://wwwuser.gwdg.de/~ggroenh/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers at gromacs.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-developers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thewww
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interface or send it to gmx-developers-request at gromacs.org.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers at gromacs.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-developers
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> www interface or send it to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers-request at gromacs.org.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers at gromacs.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-developers
>>>>>>>>>>>> Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the
>>>>>>>>>>>> www interface or send it to
>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers-request at gromacs.org.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-developers at gromacs.org
>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-developers
>>>>>>>>>>> Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the
>>>>>>>>>>> www interface or send it to gmx-developers-request at gromacs.org.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Gerrit Groenhof
>>>>>>>>>> MPI biophysical chemistry
>>>>>>>>>> Goettingen
>>>>>>>>>> Germany
>>>>>>>>>> http://wwwuser.gwdg.de/~ggroenh/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> gmx-developers mailing list
>>> gmx-developers at gromacs.org
>>> http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-developers
>>> Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the
>>> www interface or send it to gmx-developers-request at gromacs.org.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> gmx-developers mailing list
> gmx-developers at gromacs.org
> http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-developers
> Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the
> www interface or send it to gmx-developers-request at gromacs.org.
>

More information about the gromacs.org_gmx-developers mailing list