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

Comparing trunk/electrostaticMethodsPaper/electrostaticMethods.tex (file contents):
Revision 2638 by chrisfen, Sun Mar 19 19:34:53 2006 UTC vs.
Revision 2649 by chrisfen, Tue Mar 21 14:58:12 2006 UTC

# Line 65 | Line 65 | In molecular simulations, proper accumulation of the e
65   \section{Introduction}
66  
67   In molecular simulations, proper accumulation of the electrostatic
68 < interactions is considered one of the most essential and
69 < computationally demanding tasks.  The common molecular mechanics force
70 < fields are founded on representation of the atomic sites centered on
71 < full or partial charges shielded by Lennard-Jones type interactions.
72 < This means that nearly every pair interaction involves an
73 < charge-charge calculation.  Coupled with $r^{-1}$ decay, the monopole
74 < interactions quickly become a burden for molecular systems of all
75 < sizes.  For example, in small systems, the electrostatic pair
76 < interaction may not have decayed appreciably within the box length
77 < leading to an effect excluded from the pair interactions within a unit
78 < box.  In large systems, excessively large cutoffs need to be used to
79 < accurately incorporate their effect, and since the computational cost
80 < increases proportionally with the cutoff sphere, it quickly becomes an
81 < impractical task to perform these calculations.
68 > interactions is essential and is one of the most
69 > computationally-demanding tasks.  The common molecular mechanics force
70 > fields represent atomic sites with full or partial charges protected
71 > by Lennard-Jones (short range) interactions.  This means that nearly
72 > every pair interaction involves a calculation of charge-charge forces.
73 > Coupled with relatively long-ranged $r^{-1}$ decay, the monopole
74 > interactions quickly become the most expensive part of molecular
75 > simulations.  Historically, the electrostatic pair interaction would
76 > not have decayed appreciably within the typical box lengths that could
77 > be feasibly simulated.  In the larger systems that are more typical of
78 > modern simulations, large cutoffs should be used to incorporate
79 > electrostatics correctly.
80  
81 + There have been many efforts to address the proper and practical
82 + handling of electrostatic interactions, and these have resulted in a
83 + variety of techniques.\cite{Roux99,Sagui99,Tobias01} These are
84 + typically classified as implicit methods (i.e., continuum dielectrics,
85 + static dipolar fields),\cite{Born20,Grossfield00} explicit methods
86 + (i.e., Ewald summations, interaction shifting or
87 + truncation),\cite{Ewald21,Steinbach94} or a mixture of the two (i.e.,
88 + reaction field type methods, fast multipole
89 + methods).\cite{Onsager36,Rokhlin85} The explicit or mixed methods are
90 + often preferred because they physically incorporate solvent molecules
91 + in the system of interest, but these methods are sometimes difficult
92 + to utilize because of their high computational cost.\cite{Roux99} In
93 + addition to the computational cost, there have been some questions
94 + regarding possible artifacts caused by the inherent periodicity of the
95 + explicit Ewald summation.\cite{Tobias01}
96 +
97 + In this paper, we focus on a new set of shifted methods devised by
98 + Wolf {\it et al.},\cite{Wolf99} which we further extend.  These
99 + methods along with a few other mixed methods (i.e. reaction field) are
100 + compared with the smooth particle mesh Ewald
101 + sum,\cite{Onsager36,Essmann99} which is our reference method for
102 + handling long-range electrostatic interactions. The new methods for
103 + handling electrostatics have the potential to scale linearly with
104 + increasing system size since they involve only a simple modification
105 + to the direct pairwise sum.  They also lack the added periodicity of
106 + the Ewald sum, so they can be used for systems which are non-periodic
107 + or which have one- or two-dimensional periodicity.  Below, these
108 + methods are evaluated using a variety of model systems to establish
109 + their usability in molecular simulations.
110 +
111   \subsection{The Ewald Sum}
112 < The complete accumulation electrostatic interactions in a system with periodic boundary conditions (PBC) requires the consideration of the effect of all charges within a simulation box, as well as those in the periodic replicas,
112 > The complete accumulation electrostatic interactions in a system with
113 > periodic boundary conditions (PBC) requires the consideration of the
114 > effect of all charges within a (cubic) simulation box as well as those
115 > in the periodic replicas,
116   \begin{equation}
117   V_\textrm{elec} = \frac{1}{2} {\sum_{\mathbf{n}}}^\prime \left[ \sum_{i=1}^N\sum_{j=1}^N \phi\left( \mathbf{r}_{ij} + L\mathbf{n},\bm{\Omega}_i,\bm{\Omega}_j\right) \right],
118   \label{eq:PBCSum}
119   \end{equation}
120 < where the sum over $\mathbf{n}$ is a sum over all periodic box replicas
121 < with integer coordinates $\mathbf{n} = (l,m,n)$, and the prime indicates
122 < $i = j$ are neglected for $\mathbf{n} = 0$.\cite{deLeeuw80} Within the
123 < sum, $N$ is the number of electrostatic particles, $\mathbf{r}_{ij}$ is
124 < $\mathbf{r}_j - \mathbf{r}_i$, $L$ is the cell length, $\bm{\Omega}_{i,j}$ are
125 < the Euler angles for $i$ and $j$, and $\phi$ is Poisson's equation
126 < ($\phi(\mathbf{r}_{ij}) = q_i q_j |\mathbf{r}_{ij}|^{-1}$ for charge-charge
127 < interactions). In the case of monopole electrostatics,
128 < eq. (\ref{eq:PBCSum}) is conditionally convergent and is discontiuous
129 < for non-neutral systems.
120 > where the sum over $\mathbf{n}$ is a sum over all periodic box
121 > replicas with integer coordinates $\mathbf{n} = (l,m,n)$, and the
122 > prime indicates $i = j$ are neglected for $\mathbf{n} =
123 > 0$.\cite{deLeeuw80} Within the sum, $N$ is the number of electrostatic
124 > particles, $\mathbf{r}_{ij}$ is $\mathbf{r}_j - \mathbf{r}_i$, $L$ is
125 > the cell length, $\bm{\Omega}_{i,j}$ are the Euler angles for $i$ and
126 > $j$, and $\phi$ is the solution to Poisson's equation
127 > ($\phi(\mathbf{r}_{ij}) = q_i q_j |\mathbf{r}_{ij}|^{-1}$ for
128 > charge-charge interactions). In the case of monopole electrostatics,
129 > eq. (\ref{eq:PBCSum}) is conditionally convergent and is divergent for
130 > non-neutral systems.
131  
132 < This electrostatic summation problem was originally studied by Ewald
132 > The electrostatic summation problem was originally studied by Ewald
133   for the case of an infinite crystal.\cite{Ewald21}. The approach he
134   took was to convert this conditionally convergent sum into two
135   absolutely convergent summations: a short-ranged real-space summation
# Line 108 | Line 140 | V_\textrm{elec} = \frac{1}{2}& \sum_{i=1}^N\sum_{j=1}^
140   \end{split}
141   \label{eq:EwaldSum}
142   \end{equation}
143 < where $\alpha$ is a damping parameter, or separation constant, with
144 < units of \AA$^{-1}$, $\mathbf{k}$ are the reciprocal vectors and equal
143 > where $\alpha$ is the damping or convergence parameter with units of
144 > \AA$^{-1}$, $\mathbf{k}$ are the reciprocal vectors and are equal to
145   $2\pi\mathbf{n}/L^2$, and $\epsilon_\textrm{S}$ is the dielectric
146 < constant of the encompassing medium. The final two terms of
146 > constant of the surrounding medium. The final two terms of
147   eq. (\ref{eq:EwaldSum}) are a particle-self term and a dipolar term
148   for interacting with a surrounding dielectric.\cite{Allen87} This
149   dipolar term was neglected in early applications in molecular
150   simulations,\cite{Brush66,Woodcock71} until it was introduced by de
151   Leeuw {\it et al.} to address situations where the unit cell has a
152 < dipole moment and this dipole moment gets magnified through
153 < replication of the periodic images.\cite{deLeeuw80,Smith81} If this
154 < term is taken to be zero, the system is using conducting boundary
152 > dipole moment which is magnified through replication of the periodic
153 > images.\cite{deLeeuw80,Smith81} If this term is taken to be zero, the
154 > system is said to be using conducting (or ``tin-foil'') boundary
155   conditions, $\epsilon_{\rm S} = \infty$. Figure
156   \ref{fig:ewaldTime} shows how the Ewald sum has been applied over
157 < time.  Initially, due to the small size of systems, the entire
158 < simulation box was replicated to convergence.  Currently, we balance a
159 < spherical real-space cutoff with the reciprocal sum and consider the
160 < surrounding dielectric.
157 > time.  Initially, due to the small sizes of the systems that could be
158 > feasibly simulated, the entire simulation box was replicated to
159 > convergence.  In more modern simulations, the simulation boxes have
160 > grown large enough that a real-space cutoff could potentially give
161 > convergent behavior.  Indeed, it has often been observed that the
162 > reciprocal-space portion of the Ewald sum can be small and rapidly
163 > convergent compared to the real-space portion with the choice of small
164 > $\alpha$.\cite{Karasawa89,Kolafa92}
165 >
166   \begin{figure}
167   \centering
168   \includegraphics[width = \linewidth]{./ewaldProgression.pdf}
# Line 139 | Line 176 | a surrounding dielectric term is included.}
176   \label{fig:ewaldTime}
177   \end{figure}
178  
179 < The Ewald summation in the straight-forward form is an
180 < $\mathscr{O}(N^2)$ algorithm.  The separation constant $(\alpha)$
181 < plays an important role in the computational cost balance between the
182 < direct and reciprocal-space portions of the summation.  The choice of
183 < the magnitude of this value allows one to select whether the
184 < real-space or reciprocal space portion of the summation is an
185 < $\mathscr{O}(N^2)$ calcualtion (with the other being
186 < $\mathscr{O}(N)$).\cite{Sagui99} With appropriate choice of $\alpha$
187 < and thoughtful algorithm development, this cost can be brought down to
188 < $\mathscr{O}(N^{3/2})$.\cite{Perram88} The typical route taken to
189 < reduce the cost of the Ewald summation further is to set $\alpha$ such
190 < that the real-space interactions decay rapidly, allowing for a short
191 < spherical cutoff, and then optimize the reciprocal space summation.
192 < These optimizations usually involve the utilization of the fast
156 < Fourier transform (FFT),\cite{Hockney81} leading to the
179 > The original Ewald summation is an $\mathscr{O}(N^2)$ algorithm.  The
180 > convergence parameter $(\alpha)$ plays an important role in balancing
181 > the computational cost between the direct and reciprocal-space
182 > portions of the summation.  The choice of this value allows one to
183 > select whether the real-space or reciprocal space portion of the
184 > summation is an $\mathscr{O}(N^2)$ calculation (with the other being
185 > $\mathscr{O}(N)$).\cite{Sagui99} With the appropriate choice of
186 > $\alpha$ and thoughtful algorithm development, this cost can be
187 > reduced to $\mathscr{O}(N^{3/2})$.\cite{Perram88} The typical route
188 > taken to reduce the cost of the Ewald summation even further is to set
189 > $\alpha$ such that the real-space interactions decay rapidly, allowing
190 > for a short spherical cutoff. Then the reciprocal space summation is
191 > optimized.  These optimizations usually involve utilization of the
192 > fast Fourier transform (FFT),\cite{Hockney81} leading to the
193   particle-particle particle-mesh (P3M) and particle mesh Ewald (PME)
194   methods.\cite{Shimada93,Luty94,Luty95,Darden93,Essmann95} In these
195   methods, the cost of the reciprocal-space portion of the Ewald
196 < summation is from $\mathscr{O}(N^2)$ down to $\mathscr{O}(N \log N)$.
196 > summation is reduced from $\mathscr{O}(N^2)$ down to $\mathscr{O}(N
197 > \log N)$.
198  
199 < These developments and optimizations have led the use of the Ewald
200 < summation to become routine in simulations with periodic boundary
201 < conditions. However, in certain systems the intrinsic three
202 < dimensional periodicity can prove to be problematic, such as two
203 < dimensional surfaces and membranes.  The Ewald sum has been
204 < reformulated to handle 2D
205 < systems,\cite{Parry75,Parry76,Heyes77,deLeeuw79,Rhee89}, but the new
206 < methods have been found to be computationally
207 < expensive.\cite{Spohr97,Yeh99} Inclusion of a correction term in the
208 < full Ewald summation is a possible direction for enabling the handling
172 < of 2D systems and the inclusion of the optimizations described
173 < previously.\cite{Yeh99}
199 > These developments and optimizations have made the use of the Ewald
200 > summation routine in simulations with periodic boundary
201 > conditions. However, in certain systems, such as vapor-liquid
202 > interfaces and membranes, the intrinsic three-dimensional periodicity
203 > can prove problematic.  The Ewald sum has been reformulated to handle
204 > 2D systems,\cite{Parry75,Parry76,Heyes77,deLeeuw79,Rhee89}, but the
205 > new methods are computationally expensive.\cite{Spohr97,Yeh99}
206 > Inclusion of a correction term in the Ewald summation is a possible
207 > direction for handling 2D systems while still enabling the use of the
208 > modern optimizations.\cite{Yeh99}
209  
210   Several studies have recognized that the inherent periodicity in the
211 < Ewald sum can also have an effect on systems that have the same
212 < dimensionality.\cite{Roberts94,Roberts95,Luty96,Hunenberger99a,Hunenberger99b,Weber00}
213 < Good examples are solvated proteins kept at high relative
214 < concentration due to the periodicity of the electrostatics.  In these
211 > Ewald sum can also have an effect on three-dimensional
212 > systems.\cite{Roberts94,Roberts95,Luty96,Hunenberger99a,Hunenberger99b,Weber00}
213 > Solvated proteins are essentially kept at high concentration due to
214 > the periodicity of the electrostatic summation method.  In these
215   systems, the more compact folded states of a protein can be
216   artificially stabilized by the periodic replicas introduced by the
217 < Ewald summation.\cite{Weber00} Thus, care ought to be taken when
218 < considering the use of the Ewald summation where the intrinsic
219 < perodicity may negatively affect the system dynamics.
217 > Ewald summation.\cite{Weber00} Thus, care must be taken when
218 > considering the use of the Ewald summation where the assumed
219 > periodicity would introduce spurious effects in the system dynamics.
220  
186
221   \subsection{The Wolf and Zahn Methods}
222   In a recent paper by Wolf \textit{et al.}, a procedure was outlined
223   for the accurate accumulation of electrostatic interactions in an
224 < efficient pairwise fashion and lacks the inherent periodicity of the
225 < Ewald summation.\cite{Wolf99} Wolf \textit{et al.} observed that the
226 < electrostatic interaction is effectively short-ranged in condensed
227 < phase systems and that neutralization of the charge contained within
228 < the cutoff radius is crucial for potential stability. They devised a
229 < pairwise summation method that ensures charge neutrality and gives
230 < results similar to those obtained with the Ewald summation.  The
231 < resulting shifted Coulomb potential (Eq. \ref{eq:WolfPot}) includes
232 < image-charges subtracted out through placement on the cutoff sphere
233 < and a distance-dependent damping function (identical to that seen in
234 < the real-space portion of the Ewald sum) to aid convergence
224 > efficient pairwise fashion.  This procedure lacks the inherent
225 > periodicity of the Ewald summation.\cite{Wolf99} Wolf \textit{et al.}
226 > observed that the electrostatic interaction is effectively
227 > short-ranged in condensed phase systems and that neutralization of the
228 > charge contained within the cutoff radius is crucial for potential
229 > stability. They devised a pairwise summation method that ensures
230 > charge neutrality and gives results similar to those obtained with the
231 > Ewald summation.  The resulting shifted Coulomb potential
232 > (Eq. \ref{eq:WolfPot}) includes image-charges subtracted out through
233 > placement on the cutoff sphere and a distance-dependent damping
234 > function (identical to that seen in the real-space portion of the
235 > Ewald sum) to aid convergence
236   \begin{equation}
237 < V_{\textrm{Wolf}}(r_{ij})= \frac{q_iq_j \textrm{erfc}(\alpha r_{ij})}{r_{ij}}-\lim_{r_{ij}\rightarrow R_\textrm{c}}\left\{\frac{q_iq_j \textrm{erfc}(\alpha r_{ij})}{r_{ij}}\right\}.
237 > V_{\textrm{Wolf}}(r_{ij})= \frac{q_i q_j \textrm{erfc}(\alpha r_{ij})}{r_{ij}}-\lim_{r_{ij}\rightarrow R_\textrm{c}}\left\{\frac{q_iq_j \textrm{erfc}(\alpha r_{ij})}{r_{ij}}\right\}.
238   \label{eq:WolfPot}
239   \end{equation}
240   Eq. (\ref{eq:WolfPot}) is essentially the common form of a shifted
# Line 224 | Line 259 | the potential are not commensurate.  Attempts to use b
259   force expressions for use in simulations involving water.\cite{Zahn02}
260   In their work, they pointed out that the forces and derivative of
261   the potential are not commensurate.  Attempts to use both
262 < Eqs. (\ref{eq:WolfPot}) and (\ref{eq:WolfForces}) together will lead
262 > eqs. (\ref{eq:WolfPot}) and (\ref{eq:WolfForces}) together will lead
263   to poor energy conservation.  They correctly observed that taking the
264   limit shown in equation (\ref{eq:WolfPot}) {\it after} calculating the
265   derivatives gives forces for a different potential energy function
266 < than the one shown in Eq. (\ref{eq:WolfPot}).
266 > than the one shown in eq. (\ref{eq:WolfPot}).
267  
268 < Zahn \textit{et al.} proposed a modified form of this ``Wolf summation
269 < method'' as a way to use this technique in Molecular Dynamics
270 < simulations.  Taking the integral of the forces shown in equation
236 < \ref{eq:WolfForces}, they proposed a new damped Coulomb
237 < potential,
268 > Zahn \textit{et al.} introduced a modified form of this summation
269 > method as a way to use the technique in Molecular Dynamics
270 > simulations.  They proposed a new damped Coulomb potential,
271   \begin{equation}
272 < V_{\textrm{Zahn}}(r_{ij}) = q_iq_j\left\{\frac{\mathrm{erfc}\left(\alpha r_{ij}\right)}{r_{ij}}-\left[\frac{\mathrm{erfc}\left(\alpha R_\mathrm{c}\right)}{R_\mathrm{c}^2}+\frac{2\alpha}{\pi^{1/2}}\frac{\exp\left(-\alpha^2R_\mathrm{c}^2\right)}{R_\mathrm{c}}\right]\left(r_{ij}-R_\mathrm{c}\right)\right\}.
272 > V_{\textrm{Zahn}}(r_{ij}) = q_iq_j\left\{\frac{\mathrm{erfc}\left(\alpha r_{ij}\right)}{r_{ij}}-\left[\frac{\mathrm{erfc}\left(\alpha R_\mathrm{c}\right)}{R_\mathrm{c}^2}+\frac{2\alpha}{\pi^{1/2}}\frac{\exp\left(-\alpha^2R_\mathrm{c}^2\right)}{R_\mathrm{c}}\right]\left(r_{ij}-R_\mathrm{c}\right)\right\},
273   \label{eq:ZahnPot}
274   \end{equation}
275 < They showed that this potential does fairly well at capturing the
275 > and showed that this potential does fairly well at capturing the
276   structural and dynamic properties of water compared the same
277   properties obtained using the Ewald sum.
278  
# Line 270 | Line 303 | shifted potential,
303   \textit{et al.}  and Zahn \textit{et al.} by considering the standard
304   shifted potential,
305   \begin{equation}
306 < v_\textrm{SP}(r) =      \begin{cases}
306 > V_\textrm{SP}(r) =      \begin{cases}
307   v(r)-v_\textrm{c} &\quad r\leqslant R_\textrm{c} \\ 0 &\quad r >
308   R_\textrm{c}  
309   \end{cases},
# Line 278 | Line 311 | and shifted force,
311   \end{equation}
312   and shifted force,
313   \begin{equation}
314 < v_\textrm{SF}(r) =      \begin{cases}
314 > V_\textrm{SF}(r) =      \begin{cases}
315   v(r)-v_\textrm{c}-\left(\frac{d v(r)}{d r}\right)_{r=R_\textrm{c}}(r-R_\textrm{c})
316   &\quad r\leqslant R_\textrm{c} \\ 0 &\quad r > R_\textrm{c}
317                                                  \end{cases},
# Line 294 | Line 327 | of the unshifted potential itself (when inside the cut
327   The forces associated with the shifted potential are simply the forces
328   of the unshifted potential itself (when inside the cutoff sphere),
329   \begin{equation}
330 < f_{\textrm{SP}} = -\left( \frac{d v(r)}{dr} \right),
330 > F_{\textrm{SP}} = -\left( \frac{d v(r)}{dr} \right),
331   \end{equation}
332   and are zero outside.  Inside the cutoff sphere, the forces associated
333   with the shifted force form can be written,
334   \begin{equation}
335 < f_{\textrm{SF}} = -\left( \frac{d v(r)}{dr} \right) + \left(\frac{d
335 > F_{\textrm{SF}} = -\left( \frac{d v(r)}{dr} \right) + \left(\frac{d
336   v(r)}{dr} \right)_{r=R_\textrm{c}}.
337   \end{equation}
338  
339 < If the potential ($v(r)$) is taken to be the normal Coulomb potential,
339 > If the potential, $v(r)$, is taken to be the normal Coulomb potential,
340   \begin{equation}
341   v(r) = \frac{q_i q_j}{r},
342   \label{eq:Coulomb}
# Line 311 | Line 344 | al.}'s undamped prescription:
344   then the Shifted Potential ({\sc sp}) forms will give Wolf {\it et
345   al.}'s undamped prescription:
346   \begin{equation}
347 < v_\textrm{SP}(r) =
347 > V_\textrm{SP}(r) =
348   q_iq_j\left(\frac{1}{r}-\frac{1}{R_\textrm{c}}\right) \quad
349   r\leqslant R_\textrm{c},
350   \label{eq:SPPot}
351   \end{equation}
352   with associated forces,
353   \begin{equation}
354 < f_\textrm{SP}(r) = q_iq_j\left(\frac{1}{r^2}\right) \quad r\leqslant R_\textrm{c}.
354 > F_\textrm{SP}(r) = q_iq_j\left(\frac{1}{r^2}\right) \quad r\leqslant R_\textrm{c}.
355   \label{eq:SPForces}
356   \end{equation}
357   These forces are identical to the forces of the standard Coulomb
# Line 333 | Line 366 | will give,
366   The shifted force ({\sc sf}) form using the normal Coulomb potential
367   will give,
368   \begin{equation}
369 < v_\textrm{SF}(r) = q_iq_j\left[\frac{1}{r}-\frac{1}{R_\textrm{c}}+\left(\frac{1}{R_\textrm{c}^2}\right)(r-R_\textrm{c})\right] \quad r\leqslant R_\textrm{c}.
369 > V_\textrm{SF}(r) = q_iq_j\left[\frac{1}{r}-\frac{1}{R_\textrm{c}}+\left(\frac{1}{R_\textrm{c}^2}\right)(r-R_\textrm{c})\right] \quad r\leqslant R_\textrm{c}.
370   \label{eq:SFPot}
371   \end{equation}
372   with associated forces,
373   \begin{equation}
374 < f_\textrm{SF}(r) =  q_iq_j\left(\frac{1}{r^2}-\frac{1}{R_\textrm{c}^2}\right) \quad r\leqslant R_\textrm{c}.
374 > F_\textrm{SF}(r) =  q_iq_j\left(\frac{1}{r^2}-\frac{1}{R_\textrm{c}^2}\right) \quad r\leqslant R_\textrm{c}.
375   \label{eq:SFForces}
376   \end{equation}
377   This formulation has the benefits that there are no discontinuities at
378 < the cutoff distance, while the neutralizing image charges are present
379 < in both the energy and force expressions.  It would be simple to add
380 < the self-neutralizing term back when computing the total energy of the
378 > the cutoff radius, while the neutralizing image charges are present in
379 > both the energy and force expressions.  It would be simple to add the
380 > self-neutralizing term back when computing the total energy of the
381   system, thereby maintaining the agreement with the Madelung energies.
382   A side effect of this treatment is the alteration in the shape of the
383   potential that comes from the derivative term.  Thus, a degree of
# Line 352 | Line 385 | Wolf \textit{et al.} originally discussed the energeti
385   to gain functionality in dynamics simulations.
386  
387   Wolf \textit{et al.} originally discussed the energetics of the
388 < shifted Coulomb potential (Eq. \ref{eq:SPPot}), and they found that
389 < it was still insufficient for accurate determination of the energy
390 < with reasonable cutoff distances.  The calculated Madelung energies
391 < fluctuate around the expected value with increasing cutoff radius, but
392 < the oscillations converge toward the correct value.\cite{Wolf99} A
388 > shifted Coulomb potential (Eq. \ref{eq:SPPot}) and found that it was
389 > insufficient for accurate determination of the energy with reasonable
390 > cutoff distances.  The calculated Madelung energies fluctuated around
391 > the expected value as the cutoff radius was increased, but the
392 > oscillations converged toward the correct value.\cite{Wolf99} A
393   damping function was incorporated to accelerate the convergence; and
394 < though alternative functional forms could be
394 > though alternative forms for the damping function could be
395   used,\cite{Jones56,Heyes81} the complimentary error function was
396   chosen to mirror the effective screening used in the Ewald summation.
397   Incorporating this error function damping into the simple Coulomb
# Line 367 | Line 400 | v(r) = \frac{\mathrm{erfc}\left(\alpha r\right)}{r},
400   v(r) = \frac{\mathrm{erfc}\left(\alpha r\right)}{r},
401   \label{eq:dampCoulomb}
402   \end{equation}
403 < the shifted potential (Eq. (\ref{eq:SPPot})) can be reacquired using
371 < eq. (\ref{eq:shiftingForm}),
403 > the shifted potential (eq. (\ref{eq:SPPot})) becomes
404   \begin{equation}
405 < v_{\textrm{DSP}}(r) = q_iq_j\left(\frac{\textrm{erfc}\left(\alpha r\right)}{r}-\frac{\textrm{erfc}\left(\alpha R_\textrm{c}\right)}{R_\textrm{c}}\right) \quad r\leqslant R_\textrm{c},
405 > V_{\textrm{DSP}}(r) = q_iq_j\left(\frac{\textrm{erfc}\left(\alpha r\right)}{r}-\frac{\textrm{erfc}\left(\alpha R_\textrm{c}\right)}{R_\textrm{c}}\right) \quad r\leqslant R_\textrm{c},
406   \label{eq:DSPPot}
407   \end{equation}
408   with associated forces,
409   \begin{equation}
410 < f_{\textrm{DSP}}(r) = q_iq_j\left(\frac{\textrm{erfc}\left(\alpha r\right)}{r^2}+\frac{2\alpha}{\pi^{1/2}}\frac{\exp{\left(-\alpha^2r^2\right)}}{r}\right) \quad r\leqslant R_\textrm{c}.
410 > F_{\textrm{DSP}}(r) = q_iq_j\left(\frac{\textrm{erfc}\left(\alpha r\right)}{r^2}+\frac{2\alpha}{\pi^{1/2}}\frac{\exp{\left(-\alpha^2r^2\right)}}{r}\right) \quad r\leqslant R_\textrm{c}.
411   \label{eq:DSPForces}
412   \end{equation}
413 < Again, this damped shifted potential suffers from a discontinuity and
414 < a lack of the image charges in the forces.  To remedy these concerns,
415 < one may derive a {\sc sf} variant by including  the derivative
416 < term in eq. (\ref{eq:shiftingForm}),
413 > Again, this damped shifted potential suffers from a
414 > force-discontinuity at the cutoff radius, and the image charges play
415 > no role in the forces.  To remedy these concerns, one may derive a
416 > {\sc sf} variant by including the derivative term in
417 > eq. (\ref{eq:shiftingForm}),
418   \begin{equation}
419   \begin{split}
420 < v_\mathrm{DSF}(r) = q_iq_j\Biggr{[}&\frac{\mathrm{erfc}\left(\alpha r\right)}{r}-\frac{\mathrm{erfc}\left(\alpha R_\mathrm{c}\right)}{R_\mathrm{c}} \\ &\left.+\left(\frac{\mathrm{erfc}\left(\alpha R_\mathrm{c}\right)}{R_\mathrm{c}^2}+\frac{2\alpha}{\pi^{1/2}}\frac{\exp\left(-\alpha^2R_\mathrm{c}^2\right)}{R_\mathrm{c}}\right)\left(r-R_\mathrm{c}\right)\ \right] \quad r\leqslant R_\textrm{c}.
420 > V_\mathrm{DSF}(r) = q_iq_j\Biggr{[}&\frac{\mathrm{erfc}\left(\alpha r\right)}{r}-\frac{\mathrm{erfc}\left(\alpha R_\mathrm{c}\right)}{R_\mathrm{c}} \\ &\left.+\left(\frac{\mathrm{erfc}\left(\alpha R_\mathrm{c}\right)}{R_\mathrm{c}^2}+\frac{2\alpha}{\pi^{1/2}}\frac{\exp\left(-\alpha^2R_\mathrm{c}^2\right)}{R_\mathrm{c}}\right)\left(r-R_\mathrm{c}\right)\ \right] \quad r\leqslant R_\textrm{c}.
421   \label{eq:DSFPot}
422   \end{split}
423   \end{equation}
424   The derivative of the above potential will lead to the following forces,
425   \begin{equation}
426   \begin{split}
427 < f_\mathrm{DSF}(r) = q_iq_j\Biggr{[}&\left(\frac{\textrm{erfc}\left(\alpha r\right)}{r^2}+\frac{2\alpha}{\pi^{1/2}}\frac{\exp{\left(-\alpha^2r^2\right)}}{r}\right) \\ &\left.-\left(\frac{\textrm{erfc}\left(\alpha R_{\textrm{c}}\right)}{R_{\textrm{c}}^2}+\frac{2\alpha}{\pi^{1/2}}\frac{\exp{\left(-\alpha^2R_{\textrm{c}}^2\right)}}{R_{\textrm{c}}}\right)\right] \quad r\leqslant R_\textrm{c}.
427 > F_\mathrm{DSF}(r) = q_iq_j\Biggr{[}&\left(\frac{\textrm{erfc}\left(\alpha r\right)}{r^2}+\frac{2\alpha}{\pi^{1/2}}\frac{\exp{\left(-\alpha^2r^2\right)}}{r}\right) \\ &\left.-\left(\frac{\textrm{erfc}\left(\alpha R_{\textrm{c}}\right)}{R_{\textrm{c}}^2}+\frac{2\alpha}{\pi^{1/2}}\frac{\exp{\left(-\alpha^2R_{\textrm{c}}^2\right)}}{R_{\textrm{c}}}\right)\right] \quad r\leqslant R_\textrm{c}.
428   \label{eq:DSFForces}
429   \end{split}
430   \end{equation}
431 < If the damping parameter $(\alpha)$ is chosen to be zero, the undamped
432 < case, eqs. (\ref{eq:SPPot}-\ref{eq:SFForces}) are correctly recovered
433 < from eqs. (\ref{eq:DSPPot}-\ref{eq:DSFForces}).
431 > If the damping parameter $(\alpha)$ is set to zero, the undamped case,
432 > eqs. (\ref{eq:SPPot} through \ref{eq:SFForces}) are correctly
433 > recovered from eqs. (\ref{eq:DSPPot} through \ref{eq:DSFForces}).
434  
435   This new {\sc sf} potential is similar to equation \ref{eq:ZahnPot}
436   derived by Zahn \textit{et al.}; however, there are two important
# Line 409 | Line 442 | would be expected to have sudden jumps as particle dis
442   portion is different.  The missing $v_\textrm{c}$ term would not
443   affect molecular dynamics simulations (although the computed energy
444   would be expected to have sudden jumps as particle distances crossed
445 < $R_c$).  The sign problem would be a potential source of errors,
446 < however.  In fact, it introduces a discontinuity in the forces at the
447 < cutoff, because the force function is shifted in the wrong direction
448 < and doesn't cross zero at $R_\textrm{c}$.
445 > $R_c$).  The sign problem is a potential source of errors, however.
446 > In fact, it introduces a discontinuity in the forces at the cutoff,
447 > because the force function is shifted in the wrong direction and
448 > doesn't cross zero at $R_\textrm{c}$.
449  
450   Eqs. (\ref{eq:DSFPot}) and (\ref{eq:DSFForces}) result in an
451 < electrostatic summation method that is continuous in both the
452 < potential and forces and which incorporates the damping function
453 < proposed by Wolf \textit{et al.}\cite{Wolf99} In the rest of this
454 < paper, we will evaluate exactly how good these methods ({\sc sp}, {\sc
455 < sf}, damping) are at reproducing the correct electrostatic summation
456 < performed by the Ewald sum.
451 > electrostatic summation method in which the potential and forces are
452 > continuous at the cutoff radius and which incorporates the damping
453 > function proposed by Wolf \textit{et al.}\cite{Wolf99} In the rest of
454 > this paper, we will evaluate exactly how good these methods ({\sc sp},
455 > {\sc sf}, damping) are at reproducing the correct electrostatic
456 > summation performed by the Ewald sum.
457  
458   \subsection{Other alternatives}
459 < In addition to the methods described above, we will consider some
460 < other techniques that commonly get used in molecular simulations.  The
459 > In addition to the methods described above, we considered some other
460 > techniques that are commonly used in molecular simulations.  The
461   simplest of these is group-based cutoffs.  Though of little use for
462 < non-neutral molecules, collecting atoms into neutral groups takes
462 > charged molecules, collecting atoms into neutral groups takes
463   advantage of the observation that the electrostatic interactions decay
464   faster than those for monopolar pairs.\cite{Steinbach94} When
465 < considering these molecules as groups, an orientational aspect is
466 < introduced to the interactions.  Consequently, as these molecular
467 < particles move through $R_\textrm{c}$, the energy will drift upward
468 < due to the anisotropy of the net molecular dipole
469 < interactions.\cite{Rahman71} To maintain good energy conservation,
470 < both the potential and derivative need to be smoothly switched to zero
471 < at $R_\textrm{c}$.\cite{Adams79} This is accomplished using a
472 < switching function,
473 < \begin{equation}
474 < S(r) = \begin{cases} 1 &\quad r\leqslant r_\textrm{sw} \\
442 < \frac{(R_\textrm{c}+2r-3r_\textrm{sw})(R_\textrm{c}-r)^2}{(R_\textrm{c}-r_\textrm{sw})^3} &\quad r_\textrm{sw}<r\leqslant R_\textrm{c} \\
443 < 0 &\quad r>R_\textrm{c}
444 < \end{cases},
445 < \end{equation}
446 < where the above form is for a cubic function.  If a smooth second
447 < derivative is desired, a fifth (or higher) order polynomial can be
448 < used.\cite{Andrea83}
465 > considering these molecules as neutral groups, the relative
466 > orientations of the molecules control the strength of the interactions
467 > at the cutoff radius.  Consequently, as these molecular particles move
468 > through $R_\textrm{c}$, the energy will drift upward due to the
469 > anisotropy of the net molecular dipole interactions.\cite{Rahman71} To
470 > maintain good energy conservation, both the potential and derivative
471 > need to be smoothly switched to zero at $R_\textrm{c}$.\cite{Adams79}
472 > This is accomplished using a standard switching function.  If a smooth
473 > second derivative is desired, a fifth (or higher) order polynomial can
474 > be used.\cite{Andrea83}
475  
476   Group-based cutoffs neglect the surroundings beyond $R_\textrm{c}$,
477 < and to incorporate their effect, a method like Reaction Field ({\sc
478 < rf}) can be used.  The original theory for {\sc rf} was originally
479 < developed by Onsager,\cite{Onsager36} and it was applied in
480 < simulations for the study of water by Barker and Watts.\cite{Barker73}
481 < In application, it is simply an extension of the group-based cutoff
482 < method where the net dipole within the cutoff sphere polarizes an
483 < external dielectric, which reacts back on the central dipole.  The
484 < same switching function considerations for group-based cutoffs need to
485 < made for {\sc rf}, with the additional pre-specification of a
486 < dielectric constant.
477 > and to incorporate the effects of the surroundings, a method like
478 > Reaction Field ({\sc rf}) can be used.  The original theory for {\sc
479 > rf} was originally developed by Onsager,\cite{Onsager36} and it was
480 > applied in simulations for the study of water by Barker and
481 > Watts.\cite{Barker73} In modern simulation codes, {\sc rf} is simply
482 > an extension of the group-based cutoff method where the net dipole
483 > within the cutoff sphere polarizes an external dielectric, which
484 > reacts back on the central dipole.  The same switching function
485 > considerations for group-based cutoffs need to made for {\sc rf}, with
486 > the additional pre-specification of a dielectric constant.
487  
488   \section{Methods}
489  
# Line 467 | Line 493 | particle sites, but they use these summations in diffe
493   techniques utilize pairwise summations of interactions between
494   particle sites, but they use these summations in different ways.
495  
496 < In MC, the potential energy difference between two subsequent
497 < configurations dictates the progression of MC sampling.  Going back to
498 < the origins of this method, the acceptance criterion for the canonical
499 < ensemble laid out by Metropolis \textit{et al.} states that a
500 < subsequent configuration is accepted if $\Delta E < 0$ or if $\xi <
501 < \exp(-\Delta E/kT)$, where $\xi$ is a random number between 0 and
502 < 1.\cite{Metropolis53} Maintaining the correct $\Delta E$ when using an
503 < alternate method for handling the long-range electrostatics will
504 < ensure proper sampling from the ensemble.
496 > In MC, the potential energy difference between configurations dictates
497 > the progression of MC sampling.  Going back to the origins of this
498 > method, the acceptance criterion for the canonical ensemble laid out
499 > by Metropolis \textit{et al.} states that a subsequent configuration
500 > is accepted if $\Delta E < 0$ or if $\xi < \exp(-\Delta E/kT)$, where
501 > $\xi$ is a random number between 0 and 1.\cite{Metropolis53}
502 > Maintaining the correct $\Delta E$ when using an alternate method for
503 > handling the long-range electrostatics will ensure proper sampling
504 > from the ensemble.
505  
506   In MD, the derivative of the potential governs how the system will
507   progress in time.  Consequently, the force and torque vectors on each
# Line 488 | Line 514 | vectors will diverge from each other more rapidly.
514   vectors will diverge from each other more rapidly.
515  
516   \subsection{Monte Carlo and the Energy Gap}\label{sec:MCMethods}
517 +
518   The pairwise summation techniques (outlined in section
519   \ref{sec:ESMethods}) were evaluated for use in MC simulations by
520   studying the energy differences between conformations.  We took the
521   SPME-computed energy difference between two conformations to be the
522   correct behavior. An ideal performance by an alternative method would
523 < reproduce these energy differences exactly.  Since none of the methods
524 < provide exact energy differences, we used linear least squares
525 < regressions of the $\Delta E$ values between configurations using SPME
526 < against $\Delta E$ values using tested methods provides a quantitative
527 < comparison of this agreement.  Unitary results for both the
528 < correlation and correlation coefficient for these regressions indicate
529 < equivalent energetic results between the method under consideration
530 < and electrostatics handled using SPME.  Sample correlation plots for
531 < two alternate methods are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:linearFit}.
523 > reproduce these energy differences exactly (even if the absolute
524 > energies calculated by the methods are different).  Since none of the
525 > methods provide exact energy differences, we used linear least squares
526 > regressions of energy gap data to evaluate how closely the methods
527 > mimicked the Ewald energy gaps.  Unitary results for both the
528 > correlation (slope) and correlation coefficient for these regressions
529 > indicate perfect agreement between the alternative method and SPME.
530 > Sample correlation plots for two alternate methods are shown in
531 > Fig. \ref{fig:linearFit}.
532  
533   \begin{figure}
534   \centering
535   \includegraphics[width = \linewidth]{./dualLinear.pdf}
536 < \caption{Example least squares regressions of the configuration energy differences for SPC/E water systems. The upper plot shows a data set with a poor correlation coefficient ($R^2$), while the lower plot shows a data set with a good correlation coefficient.}
537 < \label{fig:linearFit}
536 > \caption{Example least squares regressions of the configuration energy
537 > differences for SPC/E water systems. The upper plot shows a data set
538 > with a poor correlation coefficient ($R^2$), while the lower plot
539 > shows a data set with a good correlation coefficient.}
540 > \label{fig:linearFit}
541   \end{figure}
542  
543   Each system type (detailed in section \ref{sec:RepSims}) was
544   represented using 500 independent configurations.  Additionally, we
545 < used seven different system types, so each of the alternate
545 > used seven different system types, so each of the alternative
546   (non-Ewald) electrostatic summation methods was evaluated using
547   873,250 configurational energy differences.
548  
# Line 542 | Line 572 | between those computed from the particular method and
572   investigated through measurement of the angle ($\theta$) formed
573   between those computed from the particular method and those from SPME,
574   \begin{equation}
575 < \theta_f = \cos^{-1} \hat{f}_\textrm{SPME} \cdot \hat{f}_\textrm{Method},
575 > \theta_f = \cos^{-1} \left(\hat{F}_\textrm{SPME} \cdot \hat{F}_\textrm{M}\right),
576   \end{equation}
577 < where $\hat{f}_\textrm{M}$ is the unit vector pointing along the
578 < force vector computed using method $M$.  
577 > where $\hat{f}_\textrm{M}$ is the unit vector pointing along the force
578 > vector computed using method M.
579  
580   Each of these $\theta$ values was accumulated in a distribution
581 < function, weighted by the area on the unit sphere.  Non-linear
581 > function and weighted by the area on the unit sphere.  Non-linear
582   Gaussian fits were used to measure the width of the resulting
583   distributions.
584  
585   \begin{figure}
586   \centering
587   \includegraphics[width = \linewidth]{./gaussFit.pdf}
588 < \caption{Sample fit of the angular distribution of the force vectors over all of the studied systems.  Gaussian fits were used to obtain values for the variance in force and torque vectors used in the following figure.}
588 > \caption{Sample fit of the angular distribution of the force vectors
589 > accumulated using all of the studied systems.  Gaussian fits were used
590 > to obtain values for the variance in force and torque vectors.}
591   \label{fig:gaussian}
592   \end{figure}
593  
# Line 572 | Line 604 | when using the reference method (SPME).
604   when using the reference method (SPME).
605  
606   \subsection{Short-time Dynamics}
607 < Evaluation of the short-time dynamics of charged systems was performed
608 < by considering the 1000 K NaCl crystal system while using a subset of the
609 < best performing pairwise methods.  The NaCl crystal was chosen to
610 < avoid possible complications involving the propagation techniques of
611 < orientational motion in molecular systems.  All systems were started
612 < with the same initial positions and velocities.  Simulations were
613 < performed under the microcanonical ensemble, and velocity
607 >
608 > The effects of the alternative electrostatic summation methods on the
609 > short-time dynamics of charged systems were evaluated by considering a
610 > NaCl crystal at a temperature of 1000 K.  A subset of the best
611 > performing pairwise methods was used in this comparison.  The NaCl
612 > crystal was chosen to avoid possible complications from the treatment
613 > of orientational motion in molecular systems.  All systems were
614 > started with the same initial positions and velocities.  Simulations
615 > were performed under the microcanonical ensemble, and velocity
616   autocorrelation functions (Eq. \ref{eq:vCorr}) were computed for each
617   of the trajectories,
618   \begin{equation}
# Line 592 | Line 626 | functions was used for comparisons.
626   functions was used for comparisons.
627  
628   \subsection{Long-Time and Collective Motion}\label{sec:LongTimeMethods}
629 < Evaluation of the long-time dynamics of charged systems was performed
630 < by considering the NaCl crystal system, again while using a subset of
631 < the best performing pairwise methods.  To enhance the atomic motion,
632 < these crystals were equilibrated at 1000 K, near the experimental
633 < $T_m$ for NaCl.  Simulations were performed under the microcanonical
634 < ensemble, and velocity information was saved every 5 fs over 100 ps
635 < trajectories.  The power spectrum ($I(\omega)$) was obtained via
602 < Fourier transform of the velocity autocorrelation function
603 < \begin{equation}
604 < I(\omega) = \frac{1}{2\pi}\int^{\infty}_{-\infty}C_v(t)e^{-i\omega t}dt,
629 >
630 > The effects of the same subset of alternative electrostatic methods on
631 > the {\it long-time} dynamics of charged systems were evaluated using
632 > the same model system (NaCl crystals at 1000K).  The power spectrum
633 > ($I(\omega)$) was obtained via Fourier transform of the velocity
634 > autocorrelation function, \begin{equation} I(\omega) =
635 > \frac{1}{2\pi}\int^{\infty}_{-\infty}C_v(t)e^{-i\omega t}dt,
636   \label{eq:powerSpec}
637   \end{equation}
638   where the frequency, $\omega=0,\ 1,\ ...,\ N-1$. Again, because the
639   NaCl crystal is composed of two different atom types, the average of
640 < the two resulting power spectra was used for comparisons.
640 > the two resulting power spectra was used for comparisons. Simulations
641 > were performed under the microcanonical ensemble, and velocity
642 > information was saved every 5 fs over 100 ps trajectories.
643  
644   \subsection{Representative Simulations}\label{sec:RepSims}
645 < A variety of common and representative simulations were analyzed to
646 < determine the relative effectiveness of the pairwise summation
647 < techniques in reproducing the energetics and dynamics exhibited by
648 < SPME.  The studied systems were as follows:
645 > A variety of representative simulations were analyzed to determine the
646 > relative effectiveness of the pairwise summation techniques in
647 > reproducing the energetics and dynamics exhibited by SPME.  We wanted
648 > to span the space of modern simulations (i.e. from liquids of neutral
649 > molecules to ionic crystals), so the systems studied were:
650   \begin{enumerate}
651 < \item Liquid Water
652 < \item Crystalline Water (Ice I$_\textrm{c}$)
653 < \item NaCl Crystal
654 < \item NaCl Melt
655 < \item Low Ionic Strength Solution of NaCl in Water
656 < \item High Ionic Strength Solution of NaCl in Water
657 < \item 6 \AA\  Radius Sphere of Argon in Water
651 > \item liquid water (SPC/E),\cite{Berendsen87}
652 > \item crystalline water (Ice I$_\textrm{c}$ crystals of SPC/E),
653 > \item NaCl crystals,
654 > \item NaCl melts,
655 > \item a low ionic strength solution of NaCl in water (0.11 M),
656 > \item a high ionic strength solution of NaCl in water (1.1 M), and
657 > \item a 6 \AA\  radius sphere of Argon in water.
658   \end{enumerate}
659   By utilizing the pairwise techniques (outlined in section
660   \ref{sec:ESMethods}) in systems composed entirely of neutral groups,
661 < charged particles, and mixtures of the two, we can comment on possible
662 < system dependence and/or universal applicability of the techniques.
661 > charged particles, and mixtures of the two, we hope to discern under
662 > which conditions it will be possible to use one of the alternative
663 > summation methodologies instead of the Ewald sum.
664  
665 < Generation of the system configurations was dependent on the system
666 < type.  For the solid and liquid water configurations, configuration
667 < snapshots were taken at regular intervals from higher temperature 1000
668 < SPC/E water molecule trajectories and each equilibrated individually.
669 < The solid and liquid NaCl systems consisted of 500 Na+ and 500 Cl-
670 < ions and were selected and equilibrated in the same fashion as the
671 < water systems.  For the low and high ionic strength NaCl solutions, 4
672 < and 40 ions were first solvated in a 1000 water molecule boxes
673 < respectively.  Ion and water positions were then randomly swapped, and
674 < the resulting configurations were again equilibrated individually.
675 < Finally, for the Argon/Water "charge void" systems, the identities of
676 < all the SPC/E waters within 6 \AA\ of the center of the equilibrated
677 < water configurations were converted to argon
665 > For the solid and liquid water configurations, configurations were
666 > taken at regular intervals from high temperature trajectories of 1000
667 > SPC/E water molecules.  Each configuration was equilibrated
668 > independently at a lower temperature (300~K for the liquid, 200~K for
669 > the crystal).  The solid and liquid NaCl systems consisted of 500
670 > $\textrm{Na}^{+}$ and 500 $\textrm{Cl}^{-}$ ions.  Configurations for
671 > these systems were selected and equilibrated in the same manner as the
672 > water systems.  The equilibrated temperatures were 1000~K for the NaCl
673 > crystal and 7000~K for the liquid. The ionic solutions were made by
674 > solvating 4 (or 40) ions in a periodic box containing 1000 SPC/E water
675 > molecules.  Ion and water positions were then randomly swapped, and
676 > the resulting configurations were again equilibrated individually.
677 > Finally, for the Argon / Water ``charge void'' systems, the identities
678 > of all the SPC/E waters within 6 \AA\ of the center of the
679 > equilibrated water configurations were converted to argon
680   (Fig. \ref{fig:argonSlice}).
681  
682 + These procedures guaranteed us a set of representative configurations
683 + from chemically-relevant systems sampled from an appropriate
684 + ensemble. Force field parameters for the ions and Argon were taken
685 + from the force field utilized by {\sc oopse}.\cite{Meineke05}
686 +
687   \begin{figure}
688   \centering
689   \includegraphics[width = \linewidth]{./slice.pdf}
690 < \caption{A slice from the center of a water box used in a charge void simulation.  The darkened region represents the boundary sphere within which the water molecules were converted to argon atoms.}
690 > \caption{A slice from the center of a water box used in a charge void
691 > simulation.  The darkened region represents the boundary sphere within
692 > which the water molecules were converted to argon atoms.}
693   \label{fig:argonSlice}
694   \end{figure}
695  
696 < \subsection{Electrostatic Summation Methods}\label{sec:ESMethods}
697 < Electrostatic summation method comparisons were performed using SPME,
698 < the {\sc sp} and {\sc sf} methods - both with damping
699 < parameters ($\alpha$) of 0.0, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.3 \AA$^{-1}$ (no, weak,
700 < moderate, and strong damping respectively), reaction field with an
701 < infinite dielectric constant, and an unmodified cutoff.  Group-based
702 < cutoffs with a fifth-order polynomial switching function were
703 < necessary for the reaction field simulations and were utilized in the
704 < SP, SF, and pure cutoff methods for comparison to the standard lack of
705 < group-based cutoffs with a hard truncation.  The SPME calculations
706 < were performed using the TINKER implementation of SPME,\cite{Ponder87}
707 < while all other method calculations were performed using the OOPSE
708 < molecular mechanics package.\cite{Meineke05}
696 > \subsection{Comparison of Summation Methods}\label{sec:ESMethods}
697 > We compared the following alternative summation methods with results
698 > from the reference method (SPME):
699 > \begin{itemize}
700 > \item {\sc sp} with damping parameters ($\alpha$) of 0.0, 0.1, 0.2,
701 > and 0.3 \AA$^{-1}$,
702 > \item {\sc sf} with damping parameters ($\alpha$) of 0.0, 0.1, 0.2,
703 > and 0.3 \AA$^{-1}$,
704 > \item reaction field with an infinite dielectric constant, and
705 > \item an unmodified cutoff.
706 > \end{itemize}
707 > Group-based cutoffs with a fifth-order polynomial switching function
708 > were utilized for the reaction field simulations.  Additionally, we
709 > investigated the use of these cutoffs with the SP, SF, and pure
710 > cutoff.  The SPME electrostatics were performed using the TINKER
711 > implementation of SPME,\cite{Ponder87} while all other method
712 > calculations were performed using the OOPSE molecular mechanics
713 > package.\cite{Meineke05} All other portions of the energy calculation
714 > (i.e. Lennard-Jones interactions) were handled in exactly the same
715 > manner across all systems and configurations.
716  
717 < These methods were additionally evaluated with three different cutoff
718 < radii (9, 12, and 15 \AA) to investigate possible cutoff radius
719 < dependence.  It should be noted that the damping parameter chosen in
720 < SPME, or so called ``Ewald Coefficient", has a significant effect on
721 < the energies and forces calculated.  Typical molecular mechanics
722 < packages default this to a value dependent on the cutoff radius and a
723 < tolerance (typically less than $1 \times 10^{-4}$ kcal/mol).  Smaller
724 < tolerances are typically associated with increased accuracy, but this
725 < usually means more time spent calculating the reciprocal-space portion
726 < of the summation.\cite{Perram88,Essmann95} The default TINKER
727 < tolerance of $1 \times 10^{-8}$ kcal/mol was used in all SPME
728 < calculations, resulting in Ewald Coefficients of 0.4200, 0.3119, and
729 < 0.2476 \AA$^{-1}$ for cutoff radii of 9, 12, and 15 \AA\ respectively.
717 > The althernative methods were also evaluated with three different
718 > cutoff radii (9, 12, and 15 \AA).  As noted previously, the
719 > convergence parameter ($\alpha$) plays a role in the balance of the
720 > real-space and reciprocal-space portions of the Ewald calculation.
721 > Typical molecular mechanics packages set this to a value dependent on
722 > the cutoff radius and a tolerance (typically less than $1 \times
723 > 10^{-4}$ kcal/mol).  Smaller tolerances are typically associated with
724 > increased accuracy at the expense of increased time spent calculating
725 > the reciprocal-space portion of the
726 > summation.\cite{Perram88,Essmann95} The default TINKER tolerance of $1
727 > \times 10^{-8}$ kcal/mol was used in all SPME calculations, resulting
728 > in Ewald Coefficients of 0.4200, 0.3119, and 0.2476 \AA$^{-1}$ for
729 > cutoff radii of 9, 12, and 15 \AA\ respectively.
730  
731   \section{Results and Discussion}
732  
# Line 689 | Line 740 | figure \ref{fig:delE}.
740   \begin{figure}
741   \centering
742   \includegraphics[width=5.5in]{./delEplot.pdf}
743 < \caption{Statistical analysis of the quality of configurational energy differences for a given electrostatic method compared with the reference Ewald sum.  Results with a value equal to 1 (dashed line) indicate $\Delta E$ values indistinguishable from those obtained using SPME.  Different values of the cutoff radius are indicated with different symbols (9\AA\ = circles, 12\AA\ = squares, and 15\AA\ = inverted triangles).}
743 > \caption{Statistical analysis of the quality of configurational energy
744 > differences for a given electrostatic method compared with the
745 > reference Ewald sum.  Results with a value equal to 1 (dashed line)
746 > indicate $\Delta E$ values indistinguishable from those obtained using
747 > SPME.  Different values of the cutoff radius are indicated with
748 > different symbols (9\AA\ = circles, 12\AA\ = squares, and 15\AA\ =
749 > inverted triangles).}
750   \label{fig:delE}
751   \end{figure}
752  
753 < In this figure, it is apparent that it is unreasonable to expect
754 < realistic results using an unmodified cutoff.  This is not all that
755 < surprising since this results in large energy fluctuations as atoms
756 < move in and out of the cutoff radius.  These fluctuations can be
757 < alleviated to some degree by using group based cutoffs with a
758 < switching function.\cite{Steinbach94} The Group Switch Cutoff row
702 < doesn't show a significant improvement in this plot because the salt
703 < and salt solution systems contain non-neutral groups, see the
704 < accompanying supporting information for a comparison where all groups
705 < are neutral.
753 > The most striking feature of this plot is how well the Shifted Force
754 > ({\sc sf}) and Shifted Potential ({\sc sp}) methods capture the energy
755 > differences.  For the undamped {\sc sf} method, and the
756 > moderately-damped {\sc sp} methods, the results are nearly
757 > indistinguishable from the Ewald results.  The other common methods do
758 > significantly less well.  
759  
760 < Correcting the resulting charged cutoff sphere is one of the purposes
761 < of the damped Coulomb summation proposed by Wolf \textit{et
762 < al.},\cite{Wolf99} and this correction indeed improves the results as
763 < seen in the Shifted-Potental rows.  While the undamped case of this
764 < method is a significant improvement over the pure cutoff, it still
765 < doesn't correlate that well with SPME.  Inclusion of potential damping
766 < improves the results, and using an $\alpha$ of 0.2 \AA $^{-1}$ shows
760 > The unmodified cutoff method is essentially unusable.  This is not
761 > surprising since hard cutoffs give large energy fluctuations as atoms
762 > or molecules move in and out of the cutoff
763 > radius.\cite{Rahman71,Adams79} These fluctuations can be alleviated to
764 > some degree by using group based cutoffs with a switching
765 > function.\cite{Adams79,Steinbach94,Leach01} However, we do not see
766 > significant improvement using the group-switched cutoff because the
767 > salt and salt solution systems contain non-neutral groups.  Interested
768 > readers can consult the accompanying supporting information for a
769 > comparison where all groups are neutral.
770 >
771 > For the {\sc sp} method, inclusion of potential damping improves the
772 > agreement with Ewald, and using an $\alpha$ of 0.2 \AA $^{-1}$ shows
773   an excellent correlation and quality of fit with the SPME results,
774 < particularly with a cutoff radius greater than 12 \AA .  Use of a
775 < larger damping parameter is more helpful for the shortest cutoff
776 < shown, but it has a detrimental effect on simulations with larger
777 < cutoffs.  In the {\sc sf} sets, increasing damping results in
778 < progressively poorer correlation.  Overall, the undamped case is the
779 < best performing set, as the correlation and quality of fits are
780 < consistently superior regardless of the cutoff distance.  This result
781 < is beneficial in that the undamped case is less computationally
782 < prohibitive do to the lack of complimentary error function calculation
783 < when performing the electrostatic pair interaction.  The reaction
784 < field results illustrates some of that method's limitations, primarily
785 < that it was developed for use in homogenous systems; although it does
786 < provide results that are an improvement over those from an unmodified
787 < cutoff.
774 > particularly with a cutoff radius greater than 12
775 > \AA .  Use of a larger damping parameter is more helpful for the
776 > shortest cutoff shown, but it has a detrimental effect on simulations
777 > with larger cutoffs.  
778 >
779 > In the {\sc sf} sets, increasing damping results in progressively
780 > worse correlation with Ewald.  Overall, the undamped case is the best
781 > performing set, as the correlation and quality of fits are
782 > consistently superior regardless of the cutoff distance.  The undamped
783 > case is also less computationally demanding (because no evaluation of
784 > the complementary error function is required).
785 >
786 > The reaction field results illustrates some of that method's
787 > limitations, primarily that it was developed for use in homogenous
788 > systems; although it does provide results that are an improvement over
789 > those from an unmodified cutoff.
790  
791   \subsection{Magnitudes of the Force and Torque Vectors}
792  
# Line 920 | Line 981 | the point charges for the pairwise summation methods;
981   increased, these peaks are smoothed out, and approach the SPME
982   curve. The damping acts as a distance dependent Gaussian screening of
983   the point charges for the pairwise summation methods; thus, the
984 < collisions are more elastic in the undamped {\sc sf} potental, and the
984 > collisions are more elastic in the undamped {\sc sf} potential, and the
985   stiffness of the potential is diminished as the electrostatic
986   interactions are softened by the damping function.  With $\alpha$
987   values of 0.2 \AA$^{-1}$, the {\sc sf} and {\sc sp} functions are

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines