1 |
|
%\documentclass[prb,aps,twocolumn,tabularx]{revtex4} |
2 |
< |
\documentclass[12pt]{article} |
3 |
< |
\usepackage{endfloat} |
2 |
> |
\documentclass[11pt]{article} |
3 |
> |
%\usepackage{endfloat} |
4 |
|
\usepackage{amsmath} |
5 |
|
\usepackage{amssymb} |
6 |
|
\usepackage{epsf} |
23 |
|
|
24 |
|
\begin{document} |
25 |
|
|
26 |
< |
This document includes system based comparisons of the studied methods with smooth particle-mesh Ewald. Each of the seven systems comprises it's own section and has it's own discussion and tabular listing of the results for the $\Delta E$, force and torque vector magnitude, and force and torque vector direction comparisons. |
26 |
> |
This document includes comparisons of the new pairwise electrostatic |
27 |
> |
methods with {\sc spme} for each of the individual systems mentioned |
28 |
> |
in paper. Each of the seven sections contains information about a |
29 |
> |
single system type and has its own discussion and tabular listing of |
30 |
> |
the results for the comparisons of $\Delta E$, the magnitudes of the |
31 |
> |
forces and torques, and directionality of the force and torque |
32 |
> |
vectors. |
33 |
|
|
34 |
< |
\section{\label{app-water}Liquid Water} |
34 |
> |
\section{\label{app:water}Liquid Water} |
35 |
|
|
36 |
+ |
The first system considered was liquid water at 300K using the SPC/E |
37 |
+ |
model of water.\cite{Berendsen87} The results for the energy gap |
38 |
+ |
comparisons and the force and torque vector magnitude comparisons are |
39 |
+ |
shown in table \ref{tab:spce}. The force and torque vector |
40 |
+ |
directionality results are displayed separately in table |
41 |
+ |
\ref{tab:spceAng}, where the effect of group-based cutoffs and |
42 |
+ |
switching functions on the {\sc sp} and {\sc sf} potentials are |
43 |
+ |
investigated. |
44 |
|
\begin{table}[htbp] |
45 |
|
\centering |
46 |
< |
\caption{Regression results for the liquid water system. Tabulated results include $\Delta E$ values (top set), force vector magnitudes (middle set) and torque vector magnitudes (bottom set). PC = Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted Potential, SF = Shifted Force, GSC = Group Switched Cutoff, and RF = Reaction Field (where $\varepsilon \approx \infty$).} |
46 |
> |
\caption{Regression results for the liquid water system. Tabulated |
47 |
> |
results include $\Delta E$ values (top set), force vector magnitudes |
48 |
> |
(middle set) and torque vector magnitudes (bottom set). PC = Pure |
49 |
> |
Cutoff, SP = Shifted Potential, SF = Shifted Force, GSC = Group |
50 |
> |
Switched Cutoff, and RF = Reaction Field (where $\varepsilon \approx |
51 |
> |
\infty$).} |
52 |
|
\begin{tabular}{@{} ccrrrrrr @{}} |
53 |
|
\\ |
54 |
|
\toprule |
68 |
|
& 0.2 & 0.992 & 0.989 & 1.001 & 0.995 & 0.994 & 0.996 \\ |
69 |
|
& 0.3 & 0.984 & 0.980 & 0.996 & 0.985 & 0.982 & 0.987 \\ |
70 |
|
GSC & & 0.918 & 0.862 & 0.852 & 0.756 & 0.801 & 0.700 \\ |
71 |
< |
RF & & 0.971 & 0.958 & 0.975 & 0.987 & 0.959 & 0.983 \\ |
53 |
< |
|
71 |
> |
RF & & 0.971 & 0.958 & 0.975 & 0.987 & 0.959 & 0.983 \\ |
72 |
|
\midrule |
55 |
– |
|
73 |
|
PC & & -1.647 & 0.000 & -0.127 & 0.000 & -0.979 & 0.000 \\ |
74 |
|
SP & 0.0 & 0.735 & 0.368 & 0.813 & 0.537 & 0.865 & 0.659 \\ |
75 |
|
& 0.1 & 0.850 & 0.612 & 0.956 & 0.887 & 0.992 & 0.979 \\ |
81 |
|
& 0.3 & 0.996 & 0.998 & 0.997 & 0.998 & 0.996 & 0.998 \\ |
82 |
|
GSC & & 0.998 & 0.995 & 1.000 & 0.999 & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ |
83 |
|
RF & & 0.999 & 0.995 & 1.000 & 0.999 & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ |
67 |
– |
|
84 |
|
\midrule |
69 |
– |
|
85 |
|
PC & & 2.387 & 0.000 & 0.183 & 0.000 & 1.282 & 0.000 \\ |
86 |
|
SP & 0.0 & 0.847 & 0.543 & 0.904 & 0.694 & 0.935 & 0.786 \\ |
87 |
|
& 0.1 & 0.922 & 0.749 & 0.980 & 0.934 & 0.996 & 0.988 \\ |
95 |
|
RF & & 0.993 & 0.989 & 0.998 & 0.996 & 1.000 & 0.999 \\ |
96 |
|
\bottomrule |
97 |
|
\end{tabular} |
98 |
< |
\label{spceTabTMag} |
98 |
> |
\label{tab:spce} |
99 |
|
\end{table} |
100 |
|
|
101 |
|
\begin{table}[htbp] |
102 |
|
\centering |
103 |
< |
\caption{Variance results from Gaussian fits to angular distributions of the force and torque vectors in the liquid water system. PC = Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted Potential, SF = Shifted Force, GSC = Group Switched Cutoff, RF = Reaction Field (where $\varepsilon \approx \infty$), GSSP = Group Switched Shifted Potential, and GSSF = Group Switched Shifted Force.} |
103 |
> |
\caption{Variance results from Gaussian fits to angular |
104 |
> |
distributions of the force and torque vectors in the liquid water |
105 |
> |
system. PC = Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted Potential, SF = Shifted Force, |
106 |
> |
GSC = Group Switched Cutoff, RF = Reaction Field (where $\varepsilon |
107 |
> |
\approx \infty$), GSSP = Group Switched Shifted Potential, and GSSF = |
108 |
> |
Group Switched Shifted Force.} |
109 |
|
\begin{tabular}{@{} ccrrrrrr @{}} |
110 |
|
\\ |
111 |
|
\toprule |
136 |
|
& 0.3 & 0.728 & 0.694 & 0.692 & 7.410 & 6.942 & 6.748 \\ |
137 |
|
\bottomrule |
138 |
|
\end{tabular} |
139 |
< |
\label{spceTabAng} |
139 |
> |
\label{tab:spceAng} |
140 |
|
\end{table} |
141 |
|
|
142 |
< |
\section{\label{app-ice}Solid Water: Ice I$_\textrm{c}$} |
142 |
> |
The water results parallel the combined results seen in the discussion |
143 |
> |
section of the main paper. There is good agreement with {\sc spme} in |
144 |
> |
both energetic and dynamic behavior when using the {\sc sf} method |
145 |
> |
with and without damping. The {\sc sp} method does well with an |
146 |
> |
$\alpha$ around 0.2 \AA$^{-1}$, particularly with cutoff radii greater |
147 |
> |
than 12 \AA. Overdamping the electrostatics reduces the agreement |
148 |
> |
between both these methods and {\sc spme}. |
149 |
|
|
150 |
+ |
The pure cutoff ({\sc pc}) method performs poorly, again mirroring the |
151 |
+ |
observations in the main portion of this paper. In contrast to the |
152 |
+ |
combined values, however, the use of a switching function and group |
153 |
+ |
based cutoffs greatly improves the results for these neutral water |
154 |
+ |
molecules. The group switched cutoff ({\sc gsc}) does not mimic the |
155 |
+ |
energetics of {\sc spme} as well as the {\sc sp} (with moderate |
156 |
+ |
damping) and {\sc sf} methods, but the dynamics are quite good. The |
157 |
+ |
switching functions correct discontinuities in the potential and |
158 |
+ |
forces, leading to these improved results. Such improvements with the |
159 |
+ |
use of a switching function have been recognized in previous |
160 |
+ |
studies,\cite{Andrea83,Steinbach94} and this proves to be a useful |
161 |
+ |
tactic for stably incorporating local area electrostatic effects. |
162 |
+ |
|
163 |
+ |
The reaction field ({\sc rf}) method simply extends upon the results |
164 |
+ |
observed in the {\sc gsc} case. Both methods are similar in form |
165 |
+ |
(i.e. neutral groups, switching function), but {\sc rf} incorporates |
166 |
+ |
an added effect from the external dielectric. This similarity |
167 |
+ |
translates into the same good dynamic results and improved energetic |
168 |
+ |
agreement with {\sc spme}. Though this agreement is not to the level |
169 |
+ |
of the moderately damped {\sc sp} and {\sc sf} methods, these results |
170 |
+ |
show how incorporating some implicit properties of the surroundings |
171 |
+ |
(i.e. $\epsilon_\textrm{S}$) can improve the solvent depiction. |
172 |
+ |
|
173 |
+ |
As a final note for the liquid water system, use of group cutoffs and a |
174 |
+ |
switching function leads to noticeable improvements in the {\sc sp} |
175 |
+ |
and {\sc sf} methods, primarily in directionality of the force and |
176 |
+ |
torque vectors (table \ref{tab:spceAng}). The {\sc sp} method shows |
177 |
+ |
significant narrowing of the angle distribution when using little to |
178 |
+ |
no damping and only modest improvement for the recommended conditions |
179 |
+ |
($\alpha$ = 0.2 \AA${-1}$ and $R_\textrm{c} \geqslant 12$~\AA). The |
180 |
+ |
{\sc sf} method shows modest narrowing across all damping and cutoff |
181 |
+ |
ranges of interest. When overdamping these methods, group cutoffs and |
182 |
+ |
the switching function do not improve the force and torque |
183 |
+ |
directionalities. |
184 |
+ |
|
185 |
+ |
\section{\label{app:ice}Solid Water: Ice I$_\textrm{c}$} |
186 |
+ |
|
187 |
+ |
In addition to the disordered molecular system above, the ordered |
188 |
+ |
molecular system of ice I$_\textrm{c}$ was also considered. The |
189 |
+ |
results for the energy gap comparisons and the force and torque vector |
190 |
+ |
magnitude comparisons are shown in table \ref{tab:ice}. The force and |
191 |
+ |
torque vector directionality results are displayed separately in table |
192 |
+ |
\ref{tab:iceAng}, where the effect of group-based cutoffs and |
193 |
+ |
switching functions on the {\sc sp} and {\sc sf} potentials are |
194 |
+ |
investigated. |
195 |
+ |
|
196 |
|
\begin{table}[htbp] |
197 |
|
\centering |
198 |
< |
\caption{Regression results for the ice I$_\textrm{c}$ system. Tabulated results include $\Delta E$ values (top set), force vector magnitudes (middle set) and torque vector magnitudes (bottom set). PC = Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted Potential, SF = Shifted Force, GSC = Group Switched Cutoff, and RF = Reaction Field (where $\varepsilon \approx \infty$).} |
198 |
> |
\caption{Regression results for the ice I$_\textrm{c}$ |
199 |
> |
system. Tabulated results include $\Delta E$ values (top set), force |
200 |
> |
vector magnitudes (middle set) and torque vector magnitudes (bottom |
201 |
> |
set). PC = Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted Potential, SF = Shifted Force, |
202 |
> |
GSC = Group Switched Cutoff, and RF = Reaction Field (where |
203 |
> |
$\varepsilon \approx \infty$).} |
204 |
|
\begin{tabular}{@{} ccrrrrrr @{}} |
205 |
|
\\ |
206 |
|
\toprule |
247 |
|
RF & & 0.994 & 0.997 & 0.997 & 0.999 & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ |
248 |
|
\bottomrule |
249 |
|
\end{tabular} |
250 |
< |
\label{iceTab} |
250 |
> |
\label{tab:ice} |
251 |
|
\end{table} |
252 |
|
|
253 |
|
\begin{table}[htbp] |
283 |
|
& 0.3 & 0.251 & 0.251 & 0.259 & 2.387 & 2.395 & 2.328 \\ |
284 |
|
\bottomrule |
285 |
|
\end{tabular} |
286 |
< |
\label{iceTabAng} |
286 |
> |
\label{tab:iceAng} |
287 |
|
\end{table} |
288 |
|
|
289 |
< |
\section{\label{app-melt}NaCl Melt} |
289 |
> |
Highly ordered systems are a difficult test for the pairwise methods |
290 |
> |
in that they lack the implicit periodicity of the Ewald summation. As |
291 |
> |
expected, the energy gap agreement with {\sc spme} is reduced for the |
292 |
> |
{\sc sp} and {\sc sf} methods with parameters that were acceptable for |
293 |
> |
the disordered liquid system. Moving to higher $R_\textrm{c}$ helps |
294 |
> |
improve the agreement, though at an increase in computational cost. |
295 |
> |
The dynamics of this crystalline system (both in magnitude and |
296 |
> |
direction) are little affected. Both methods still reproduce the Ewald |
297 |
> |
behavior with the same parameter recommendations from the previous |
298 |
> |
section. |
299 |
|
|
300 |
+ |
It is also worth noting that {\sc rf} exhibits improved energy gap |
301 |
+ |
results over the liquid water system. One possible explanation is |
302 |
+ |
that the ice I$_\textrm{c}$ crystal is ordered such that the net |
303 |
+ |
dipole moment of the crystal is zero. With $\epsilon_\textrm{S} = |
304 |
+ |
\infty$, the reaction field incorporates this structural organization |
305 |
+ |
by actively enforcing a zeroed dipole moment within each cutoff |
306 |
+ |
sphere. |
307 |
+ |
|
308 |
+ |
\section{\label{app:melt}NaCl Melt} |
309 |
+ |
|
310 |
+ |
A high temperature NaCl melt was tested to gauge the accuracy of the |
311 |
+ |
pairwise summation methods in a disordered system of charges. The |
312 |
+ |
results for the energy gap comparisons and the force vector magnitude |
313 |
+ |
comparisons are shown in table \ref{tab:melt}. The force vector |
314 |
+ |
directionality results are displayed separately in table |
315 |
+ |
\ref{tab:meltAng}. |
316 |
+ |
|
317 |
|
\begin{table}[htbp] |
318 |
|
\centering |
319 |
|
\caption{Regression results for the molten NaCl system. Tabulated results include $\Delta E$ values (top set) and force vector magnitudes (bottom set). PC = Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted Potential, and SF = Shifted Force.} |
327 |
|
Method & $\alpha$ & slope & $R^2$ & slope & $R^2$ & slope & $R^2$ \\ |
328 |
|
\midrule |
329 |
|
PC & & -0.008 & 0.000 & -0.049 & 0.005 & -0.136 & 0.020 \\ |
330 |
< |
SP & 0.0 & 0.937 & 0.996 & 0.880 & 0.995 & 0.971 & 0.999 \\ |
331 |
< |
& 0.1 & 1.004 & 0.999 & 0.958 & 1.000 & 0.928 & 0.994 \\ |
330 |
> |
SP & 0.0 & 0.928 & 0.996 & 0.931 & 0.998 & 0.950 & 0.999 \\ |
331 |
> |
& 0.1 & 0.977 & 0.998 & 0.998 & 1.000 & 0.997 & 1.000 \\ |
332 |
|
& 0.2 & 0.960 & 1.000 & 0.813 & 0.996 & 0.811 & 0.954 \\ |
333 |
|
& 0.3 & 0.671 & 0.994 & 0.439 & 0.929 & 0.535 & 0.831 \\ |
334 |
< |
SF & 0.0 & 1.001 & 1.000 & 0.949 & 1.000 & 1.008 & 1.000 \\ |
335 |
< |
& 0.1 & 1.025 & 1.000 & 0.960 & 1.000 & 0.929 & 0.994 \\ |
334 |
> |
SF & 0.0 & 0.996 & 1.000 & 0.995 & 1.000 & 0.997 & 1.000 \\ |
335 |
> |
& 0.1 & 1.021 & 1.000 & 1.024 & 1.000 & 1.007 & 1.000 \\ |
336 |
|
& 0.2 & 0.966 & 1.000 & 0.813 & 0.996 & 0.811 & 0.954 \\ |
337 |
|
& 0.3 & 0.671 & 0.994 & 0.439 & 0.929 & 0.535 & 0.831 \\ |
338 |
|
\midrule |
339 |
|
PC & & 1.103 & 0.000 & 0.989 & 0.000 & 0.802 & 0.000 \\ |
340 |
< |
SP & 0.0 & 0.976 & 0.983 & 1.001 & 0.991 & 0.985 & 0.995 \\ |
341 |
< |
& 0.1 & 0.996 & 0.997 & 0.997 & 0.998 & 0.996 & 0.996 \\ |
340 |
> |
SP & 0.0 & 0.973 & 0.981 & 0.975 & 0.988 & 0.979 & 0.992 \\ |
341 |
> |
& 0.1 & 0.987 & 0.992 & 0.993 & 0.998 & 0.997 & 0.999 \\ |
342 |
|
& 0.2 & 0.993 & 0.996 & 0.985 & 0.988 & 0.986 & 0.981 \\ |
343 |
|
& 0.3 & 0.956 & 0.956 & 0.940 & 0.912 & 0.948 & 0.929 \\ |
344 |
< |
SF & 0.0 & 0.997 & 0.998 & 0.995 & 0.999 & 0.999 & 1.000 \\ |
345 |
< |
& 0.1 & 1.001 & 0.997 & 0.997 & 0.999 & 0.996 & 0.996 \\ |
344 |
> |
SF & 0.0 & 0.996 & 0.997 & 0.997 & 0.999 & 0.998 & 1.000 \\ |
345 |
> |
& 0.1 & 1.000 & 0.997 & 1.001 & 0.999 & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ |
346 |
|
& 0.2 & 0.994 & 0.996 & 0.985 & 0.988 & 0.986 & 0.981 \\ |
347 |
|
& 0.3 & 0.956 & 0.956 & 0.940 & 0.912 & 0.948 & 0.929 \\ |
348 |
|
\bottomrule |
349 |
|
\end{tabular} |
350 |
< |
\label{meltTab} |
350 |
> |
\label{tab:melt} |
351 |
|
\end{table} |
352 |
|
|
353 |
|
\begin{table}[htbp] |
372 |
|
& 0.3 & 23.734 & 67.305 & 57.252 \\ |
373 |
|
\bottomrule |
374 |
|
\end{tabular} |
375 |
< |
\label{meltTabAng} |
375 |
> |
\label{tab:meltAng} |
376 |
|
\end{table} |
377 |
|
|
378 |
< |
\section{\label{app-salt}NaCl Crystal} |
378 |
> |
The molten NaCl system shows more sensitivity to the electrostatic |
379 |
> |
damping than the water systems. The most noticeable point is that the |
380 |
> |
undamped {\sc sf} method does very well at replicating the {\sc spme} |
381 |
> |
configurational energy differences and forces. Light damping appears |
382 |
> |
to minimally improve the dynamics, but this comes with a deterioration |
383 |
> |
of the energy gap results. In contrast, this light damping improves |
384 |
> |
the {\sc sp} energy gaps and forces. Moderate and heavy electrostatic |
385 |
> |
damping reduce the agreement with {\sc spme} for both methods. From |
386 |
> |
these observations, the undamped {\sc sf} method is the best choice |
387 |
> |
for disordered systems of charges. |
388 |
|
|
389 |
+ |
\section{\label{app:salt}NaCl Crystal} |
390 |
+ |
|
391 |
+ |
A 1000K NaCl crystal was used to investigate the accuracy of the |
392 |
+ |
pairwise summation methods in an ordered system of charged |
393 |
+ |
particles. The results for the energy gap comparisons and the force |
394 |
+ |
vector magnitude comparisons are shown in table \ref{tab:salt}. The |
395 |
+ |
force vector directionality results are displayed separately in table |
396 |
+ |
\ref{tab:saltAng}. |
397 |
+ |
|
398 |
|
\begin{table}[htbp] |
399 |
|
\centering |
400 |
< |
\caption{Regression results for the crystalline NaCl system. Tabulated results include $\Delta E$ values (top set) and force vector magnitudes (bottom set). PC = Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted Potential, and SF = Shifted Force.} |
400 |
> |
\caption{Regression results for the crystalline NaCl |
401 |
> |
system. Tabulated results include $\Delta E$ values (top set) and |
402 |
> |
force vector magnitudes (bottom set). PC = Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted |
403 |
> |
Potential, and SF = Shifted Force.} |
404 |
|
\begin{tabular}{@{} ccrrrrrr @{}} |
405 |
|
\\ |
406 |
|
\toprule |
431 |
|
& 0.3 & 0.950 & 0.952 & 0.950 & 0.953 & 0.950 & 0.953 \\ |
432 |
|
\bottomrule |
433 |
|
\end{tabular} |
434 |
< |
\label{saltTab} |
434 |
> |
\label{tab:salt} |
435 |
|
\end{table} |
436 |
|
|
437 |
|
\begin{table}[htbp] |
438 |
|
\centering |
439 |
< |
\caption{Variance results from Gaussian fits to angular distributions of the force vectors in the crystalline NaCl system. PC = Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted Potential, SF = Shifted Force, GSC = Group Switched Cutoff, and RF = Reaction Field (where $\varepsilon \approx \infty$).} |
439 |
> |
\caption{Variance results from Gaussian fits to angular |
440 |
> |
distributions of the force vectors in the crystalline NaCl system. PC |
441 |
> |
= Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted Potential, SF = Shifted Force, GSC = Group |
442 |
> |
Switched Cutoff, and RF = Reaction Field (where $\varepsilon \approx |
443 |
> |
\infty$).} |
444 |
|
\begin{tabular}{@{} ccrrrrrr @{}} |
445 |
|
\\ |
446 |
|
\toprule |
460 |
|
& 0.3 & 31.120 & 31.105 & 31.029 \\ |
461 |
|
\bottomrule |
462 |
|
\end{tabular} |
463 |
< |
\label{saltTabAng} |
463 |
> |
\label{tab:saltAng} |
464 |
|
\end{table} |
465 |
|
|
466 |
< |
\section{\label{app-sol1}Weak NaCl Solution} |
466 |
> |
The crystalline NaCl system is the most challenging test case for the |
467 |
> |
pairwise summation methods, as evidenced by the results in tables |
468 |
> |
\ref{tab:salt} and \ref{tab:saltAng}. The undamped and weakly damped |
469 |
> |
{\sc sf} methods with a 12 \AA\ cutoff radius seem to be the best |
470 |
> |
choices. These methods match well with {\sc spme} across the energy |
471 |
> |
gap, force magnitude, and force directionality tests. The {\sc sp} |
472 |
> |
method struggles in all cases, with the exception of good dynamics |
473 |
> |
reproduction when using weak electrostatic damping with a large cutoff |
474 |
> |
radius. |
475 |
|
|
476 |
+ |
The moderate electrostatic damping case is not as good as we would |
477 |
+ |
expect given the long-time dynamics results observed for this |
478 |
+ |
system. Since the data tabulated in tables \ref{tab:salt} and |
479 |
+ |
\ref{tab:saltAng} are a test of instantaneous dynamics, this indicates |
480 |
+ |
that good long-time dynamics comes in part at the expense of |
481 |
+ |
short-time dynamics. |
482 |
+ |
|
483 |
+ |
\section{\label{app:solnWeak}Weak NaCl Solution} |
484 |
+ |
|
485 |
+ |
In an effort to bridge the charged atomic and neutral molecular |
486 |
+ |
systems, Na$^+$ and Cl$^-$ ion charge defects were incorporated into |
487 |
+ |
the liquid water system. This low ionic strength system consists of 4 |
488 |
+ |
ions in the 1000 SPC/E water solvent ($\approx$0.11 M). The results |
489 |
+ |
for the energy gap comparisons and the force and torque vector |
490 |
+ |
magnitude comparisons are shown in table \ref{tab:solnWeak}. The |
491 |
+ |
force and torque vector directionality results are displayed |
492 |
+ |
separately in table \ref{tab:solnWeakAng}, where the effect of |
493 |
+ |
group-based cutoffs and switching functions on the {\sc sp} and {\sc |
494 |
+ |
sf} potentials are investigated. |
495 |
+ |
|
496 |
|
\begin{table}[htbp] |
497 |
|
\centering |
498 |
< |
\caption{Regression results for the weak NaCl solution system. Tabulated results include $\Delta E$ values (top set), force vector magnitudes (middle set) and torque vector magnitudes (bottom set). PC = Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted Potential, SF = Shifted Force, GSC = Group Switched Cutoff, RF = Reaction Field (where $\varepsilon \approx \infty$), GSSP = Group Switched Shifted Potential, and GSSF = Group Switched Shifted Force.} |
498 |
> |
\caption{Regression results for the weak NaCl solution |
499 |
> |
system. Tabulated results include $\Delta E$ values (top set), force |
500 |
> |
vector magnitudes (middle set) and torque vector magnitudes (bottom |
501 |
> |
set). PC = Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted Potential, SF = Shifted Force, |
502 |
> |
GSC = Group Switched Cutoff, and RF = Reaction Field (where $\varepsilon |
503 |
> |
\approx \infty$).} |
504 |
|
\begin{tabular}{@{} ccrrrrrr @{}} |
505 |
|
\\ |
506 |
|
\toprule |
547 |
|
RF & & 0.984 & 0.975 & 0.996 & 0.995 & 0.998 & 0.998 \\ |
548 |
|
\bottomrule |
549 |
|
\end{tabular} |
550 |
< |
\label{sol1Tab} |
550 |
> |
\label{tab:solnWeak} |
551 |
|
\end{table} |
552 |
|
|
553 |
|
\begin{table}[htbp] |
554 |
|
\centering |
555 |
< |
\caption{Variance results from Gaussian fits to angular distributions of the force and torque vectors in the weak NaCl solution system. PC = Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted Potential, SF = Shifted Force, GSC = Group Switched Cutoff, RF = Reaction Field (where $\varepsilon \approx \infty$), GSSP = Group Switched Shifted Potential, and GSSF = Group Switched Shifted Force.} |
555 |
> |
\caption{Variance results from Gaussian fits to angular |
556 |
> |
distributions of the force and torque vectors in the weak NaCl |
557 |
> |
solution system. PC = Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted Potential, SF = |
558 |
> |
Shifted Force, GSC = Group Switched Cutoff, RF = Reaction Field (where |
559 |
> |
$\varepsilon \approx \infty$), GSSP = Group Switched Shifted |
560 |
> |
Potential, and GSSF = Group Switched Shifted Force.} |
561 |
|
\begin{tabular}{@{} ccrrrrrr @{}} |
562 |
|
\\ |
563 |
|
\toprule |
588 |
|
& 0.3 & 0.954 & 0.759 & 0.780 & 12.337 & 7.684 & 7.849 \\ |
589 |
|
\bottomrule |
590 |
|
\end{tabular} |
591 |
< |
\label{sol1TabAng} |
591 |
> |
\label{tab:solnWeakAng} |
592 |
|
\end{table} |
593 |
|
|
594 |
< |
\section{\label{app-sol10}Strong NaCl Solution} |
594 |
> |
Because this system is a perturbation of the pure liquid water system, |
595 |
> |
comparisons are best drawn between these two sets. The {\sc sp} and |
596 |
> |
{\sc sf} methods are not significantly affected by the inclusion of a |
597 |
> |
few ions. The aspect of cutoff sphere neutralization aids in the |
598 |
> |
smooth incorporation of these ions; thus, all of the observations |
599 |
> |
regarding these methods carry over from section \ref{app:water}. The |
600 |
> |
differences between these systems are more visible for the {\sc rf} |
601 |
> |
method. Though good force agreement is still maintained, the energy |
602 |
> |
gaps show a significant increase in the scatter of the data. |
603 |
|
|
604 |
+ |
\section{\label{app:solnStr}Strong NaCl Solution} |
605 |
+ |
|
606 |
+ |
The bridging of the charged atomic and neutral molecular systems was |
607 |
+ |
further developed by considering a high ionic strength system |
608 |
+ |
consisting of 40 ions in the 1000 SPC/E water solvent ($\approx$1.1 |
609 |
+ |
M). The results for the energy gap comparisons and the force and |
610 |
+ |
torque vector magnitude comparisons are shown in table |
611 |
+ |
\ref{tab:solnStr}. The force and torque vector directionality |
612 |
+ |
results are displayed separately in table \ref{tab:solnStrAng}, where |
613 |
+ |
the effect of group-based cutoffs and switching functions on the {\sc |
614 |
+ |
sp} and {\sc sf} potentials are investigated. |
615 |
+ |
|
616 |
|
\begin{table}[htbp] |
617 |
|
\centering |
618 |
< |
\caption{Regression results for the strong NaCl solution system. Tabulated results include $\Delta E$ values (top set), force vector magnitudes (middle set) and torque vector magnitudes (bottom set). PC = Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted Potential, SF = Shifted Force, GSC = Group Switched Cutoff, and RF = Reaction Field (where $\varepsilon \approx \infty$).} |
618 |
> |
\caption{Regression results for the strong NaCl solution |
619 |
> |
system. Tabulated results include $\Delta E$ values (top set), force |
620 |
> |
vector magnitudes (middle set) and torque vector magnitudes (bottom |
621 |
> |
set). PC = Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted Potential, SF = Shifted Force, |
622 |
> |
GSC = Group Switched Cutoff, and RF = Reaction Field (where |
623 |
> |
$\varepsilon \approx \infty$).} |
624 |
|
\begin{tabular}{@{} ccrrrrrr @{}} |
625 |
|
\\ |
626 |
|
\toprule |
667 |
|
RF & & 0.949 & 0.939 & 0.988 & 0.988 & 0.992 & 0.993 \\ |
668 |
|
\bottomrule |
669 |
|
\end{tabular} |
670 |
< |
\label{sol10Tab} |
670 |
> |
\label{tab:solnStr} |
671 |
|
\end{table} |
672 |
|
|
673 |
|
\begin{table}[htbp] |
703 |
|
& 0.3 & 1.752 & 1.454 & 1.451 & 23.587 & 14.390 & 14.245 \\ |
704 |
|
\bottomrule |
705 |
|
\end{tabular} |
706 |
< |
\label{sol10TabAng} |
706 |
> |
\label{tab:solnStrAng} |
707 |
|
\end{table} |
708 |
|
|
709 |
< |
\section{\label{app-argon}Argon Sphere in Water} |
709 |
> |
The {\sc rf} method struggles with the jump in ionic strength. The |
710 |
> |
configuration energy differences degrade to unusable levels while the |
711 |
> |
forces and torques show a more modest reduction in the agreement with |
712 |
> |
{\sc spme}. The {\sc rf} method was designed for homogeneous systems, |
713 |
> |
and this attribute is apparent in these results. |
714 |
|
|
715 |
+ |
The {\sc sp} and {\sc sf} methods require larger cutoffs to maintain |
716 |
+ |
their agreement with {\sc spme}. With these results, we still |
717 |
+ |
recommend no to moderate damping for the {\sc sf} method and moderate |
718 |
+ |
damping for the {\sc sp} method, both with cutoffs greater than 12 |
719 |
+ |
\AA. |
720 |
+ |
|
721 |
+ |
\section{\label{app:argon}Argon Sphere in Water} |
722 |
+ |
|
723 |
+ |
The final model system studied was a 6 \AA\ sphere of Argon solvated |
724 |
+ |
by SPC/E water. The results for the energy gap comparisons and the |
725 |
+ |
force and torque vector magnitude comparisons are shown in table |
726 |
+ |
\ref{tab:argon}. The force and torque vector directionality |
727 |
+ |
results are displayed separately in table \ref{tab:argonAng}, where |
728 |
+ |
the effect of group-based cutoffs and switching functions on the {\sc |
729 |
+ |
sp} and {\sc sf} potentials are investigated. |
730 |
+ |
|
731 |
|
\begin{table}[htbp] |
732 |
|
\centering |
733 |
< |
\caption{Regression results for the 6 \AA\ argon sphere in liquid water system. Tabulated results include $\Delta E$ values (top set), force vector magnitudes (middle set) and torque vector magnitudes (bottom set). PC = Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted Potential, SF = Shifted Force, GSC = Group Switched Cutoff, and RF = Reaction Field (where $\varepsilon \approx \infty$).} |
733 |
> |
\caption{Regression results for the 6 \AA\ Argon sphere in liquid |
734 |
> |
water system. Tabulated results include $\Delta E$ values (top set), |
735 |
> |
force vector magnitudes (middle set) and torque vector magnitudes |
736 |
> |
(bottom set). PC = Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted Potential, SF = Shifted |
737 |
> |
Force, GSC = Group Switched Cutoff, and RF = Reaction Field (where |
738 |
> |
$\varepsilon \approx \infty$).} |
739 |
|
\begin{tabular}{@{} ccrrrrrr @{}} |
740 |
|
\\ |
741 |
|
\toprule |
782 |
|
RF & & 0.993 & 0.988 & 0.997 & 0.995 & 0.999 & 0.998 \\ |
783 |
|
\bottomrule |
784 |
|
\end{tabular} |
785 |
< |
\label{argonTab} |
785 |
> |
\label{tab:argon} |
786 |
|
\end{table} |
787 |
|
|
788 |
|
\begin{table}[htbp] |
789 |
|
\centering |
790 |
< |
\caption{Variance results from Gaussian fits to angular distributions of the force and torque vectors in the 6 \AA\ sphere of argon in liquid water system. PC = Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted Potential, SF = Shifted Force, GSC = Group Switched Cutoff, RF = Reaction Field (where $\varepsilon \approx \infty$), GSSP = Group Switched Shifted Potential, and GSSF = Group Switched Shifted Force.} |
790 |
> |
\caption{Variance results from Gaussian fits to angular |
791 |
> |
distributions of the force and torque vectors in the 6 \AA\ sphere of |
792 |
> |
Argon in liquid water system. PC = Pure Cutoff, SP = Shifted |
793 |
> |
Potential, SF = Shifted Force, GSC = Group Switched Cutoff, RF = |
794 |
> |
Reaction Field (where $\varepsilon \approx \infty$), GSSP = Group |
795 |
> |
Switched Shifted Potential, and GSSF = Group Switched Shifted Force.} |
796 |
|
\begin{tabular}{@{} ccrrrrrr @{}} |
797 |
|
\\ |
798 |
|
\toprule |
823 |
|
& 0.3 & 0.814 & 0.825 & 0.816 & 8.325 & 8.447 & 8.132 \\ |
824 |
|
\bottomrule |
825 |
|
\end{tabular} |
826 |
< |
\label{argonTabAng} |
826 |
> |
\label{tab:argonAng} |
827 |
|
\end{table} |
828 |
|
|
829 |
< |
\end{document} |
829 |
> |
This system does not appear to show any significant deviations from |
830 |
> |
the previously observed results. The {\sc sp} and {\sc sf} methods |
831 |
> |
have aggrements similar to those observed in section |
832 |
> |
\ref{app:water}. The only significant difference is the improvement |
833 |
> |
in the configuration energy differences for the {\sc rf} method. This |
834 |
> |
is surprising in that we are introducing an inhomogeneity to the |
835 |
> |
system; however, this inhomogeneity is charge-neutral and does not |
836 |
> |
result in charged cutoff spheres. The charge-neutrality of the cutoff |
837 |
> |
spheres, which the {\sc sp} and {\sc sf} methods explicitly enforce, |
838 |
> |
seems to play a greater role in the stability of the {\sc rf} method |
839 |
> |
than the required homogeneity of the environment. |
840 |
> |
|
841 |
> |
\newpage |
842 |
> |
|
843 |
> |
\bibliographystyle{jcp2} |
844 |
> |
\bibliography{electrostaticMethods} |
845 |
> |
|
846 |
> |
\end{document} |