[gmx-users] NVE of water
gmx3 at hotmail.com
Mon Mar 1 16:53:36 CET 2010
> Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 15:44:28 +0100
> From: r.friedman at bioc.uzh.ch
> To: gmx-users at gromacs.org
> Subject: Re: [gmx-users] NVE of water
> Mark Abraham wrote:
> > On 2/03/2010 12:39 AM, Ran Friedman wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> I would still argue that double precision is important.
> > Oh? The discussion of Table 4 of
> > http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ct700301q (2008 GROMACS 4 JCTC
> > paper) suggested to me that single-precision NVE could be done well in
> > GROMACS. Am I missing something?
> > Mark
> "The presented benchmarks were performed in the NVT ensemble" (section IX).
> Or am I missing something?
No, but everything that affects energy conservation in NVE also affects it in NVT,
in addition the thermostat affect the integration accuracy in NVT (and in NVT
you do not measure energy conservation from the total energy, but from the
conserved energy quantity).
Double precision can be important for energy conservation, but often other
factors deteriorate the energy conservation orders of magnitude from what
can be reached in single precision already. Double precision is only required
for testing or when you really need to generate an NVE ensemble.
> gmx-users mailing list gmx-users at gromacs.org
> Please search the archive at http://www.gromacs.org/search before posting!
> Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the
> www interface or send it to gmx-users-request at gromacs.org.
> Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/mailing_lists/users.php
New Windows 7: Simplify what you do everyday. Find the right PC for you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the gromacs.org_gmx-users