3 |
|
\chapter{\label{chapt:intro}Introduction and Theoretical Background} |
4 |
|
|
5 |
|
|
6 |
– |
|
7 |
– |
\section{\label{introSec:theory}Theoretical Background} |
8 |
– |
|
6 |
|
The techniques used in the course of this research fall under the two |
7 |
|
main classes of molecular simulation: Molecular Dynamics and Monte |
8 |
|
Carlo. Molecular Dynamic simulations integrate the equations of motion |
9 |
< |
for a given system of particles, allowing the researher to gain |
9 |
> |
for a given system of particles, allowing the researcher to gain |
10 |
|
insight into the time dependent evolution of a system. Diffusion |
11 |
|
phenomena are readily studied with this simulation technique, making |
12 |
|
Molecular Dynamics the main simulation technique used in this |
13 |
|
research. Other aspects of the research fall under the Monte Carlo |
14 |
|
class of simulations. In Monte Carlo, the configuration space |
15 |
< |
available to the collection of particles is sampled stochastichally, |
15 |
> |
available to the collection of particles is sampled stochastically, |
16 |
|
or randomly. Each configuration is chosen with a given probability |
17 |
< |
based on the Maxwell Boltzman distribution. These types of simulations |
17 |
> |
based on the Maxwell Boltzmann distribution. These types of simulations |
18 |
|
are best used to probe properties of a system that are only dependent |
19 |
|
only on the state of the system. Structural information about a system |
20 |
|
is most readily obtained through these types of methods. |
27 |
|
thermodynamic properties of the system are being probed, then chose |
28 |
|
which method best suits that objective. |
29 |
|
|
30 |
< |
\subsection{\label{introSec:statThermo}Statistical Thermodynamics} |
30 |
> |
\section{\label{introSec:statThermo}Statistical Mechanics} |
31 |
|
|
32 |
< |
ergodic hypothesis |
32 |
> |
The following section serves as a brief introduction to some of the |
33 |
> |
Statistical Mechanics concepts present in this dissertation. What |
34 |
> |
follows is a brief derivation of Boltzmann weighted statistics, and an |
35 |
> |
explanation of how one can use the information to calculate an |
36 |
> |
observable for a system. This section then concludes with a brief |
37 |
> |
discussion of the ergodic hypothesis and its relevance to this |
38 |
> |
research. |
39 |
|
|
40 |
< |
enesemble averages |
40 |
> |
\subsection{\label{introSec:boltzman}Boltzmann weighted statistics} |
41 |
|
|
42 |
< |
\subsection{\label{introSec:monteCarlo}Monte Carlo Simulations} |
42 |
> |
Consider a system, $\gamma$, with some total energy,, $E_{\gamma}$. |
43 |
> |
Let $\Omega(E_{\gamma})$ represent the number of degenerate ways |
44 |
> |
$\boldsymbol{\Gamma}$, the collection of positions and conjugate |
45 |
> |
momenta of system $\gamma$, can be configured to give |
46 |
> |
$E_{\gamma}$. Further, if $\gamma$ is in contact with a bath system |
47 |
> |
where energy is exchanged between the two systems, $\Omega(E)$, where |
48 |
> |
$E$ is the total energy of both systems, can be represented as |
49 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
50 |
> |
\Omega(E) = \Omega(E_{\gamma}) \times \Omega(E - E_{\gamma}) |
51 |
> |
\label{introEq:SM1} |
52 |
> |
\end{equation} |
53 |
> |
Or additively as |
54 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
55 |
> |
\ln \Omega(E) = \ln \Omega(E_{\gamma}) + \ln \Omega(E - E_{\gamma}) |
56 |
> |
\label{introEq:SM2} |
57 |
> |
\end{equation} |
58 |
|
|
59 |
+ |
The solution to Eq.~\ref{introEq:SM2} maximizes the number of |
60 |
+ |
degenerative configurations in $E$. \cite{Frenkel1996} |
61 |
+ |
This gives |
62 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
63 |
+ |
\frac{\partial \ln \Omega(E)}{\partial E_{\gamma}} = 0 = |
64 |
+ |
\frac{\partial \ln \Omega(E_{\gamma})}{\partial E_{\gamma}} |
65 |
+ |
+ |
66 |
+ |
\frac{\partial \ln \Omega(E_{\text{bath}})}{\partial E_{\text{bath}}} |
67 |
+ |
\frac{\partial E_{\text{bath}}}{\partial E_{\gamma}} |
68 |
+ |
\label{introEq:SM3} |
69 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
70 |
+ |
Where $E_{\text{bath}}$ is $E-E_{\gamma}$, and |
71 |
+ |
$\frac{\partial E_{\text{bath}}}{\partial E_{\gamma}}$ is |
72 |
+ |
$-1$. Eq.~\ref{introEq:SM3} becomes |
73 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
74 |
+ |
\frac{\partial \ln \Omega(E_{\gamma})}{\partial E_{\gamma}} = |
75 |
+ |
\frac{\partial \ln \Omega(E_{\text{bath}})}{\partial E_{\text{bath}}} |
76 |
+ |
\label{introEq:SM4} |
77 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
78 |
+ |
|
79 |
+ |
At this point, one can draw a relationship between the maximization of |
80 |
+ |
degeneracy in Eq.~\ref{introEq:SM3} and the second law of |
81 |
+ |
thermodynamics. Namely, that for a closed system, entropy will |
82 |
+ |
increase for an irreversible process.\cite{chandler:1987} Here the |
83 |
+ |
process is the partitioning of energy among the two systems. This |
84 |
+ |
allows the following definition of entropy: |
85 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
86 |
+ |
S = k_B \ln \Omega(E) |
87 |
+ |
\label{introEq:SM5} |
88 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
89 |
+ |
Where $k_B$ is the Boltzmann constant. Having defined entropy, one can |
90 |
+ |
also define the temperature of the system using the relation |
91 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
92 |
+ |
\frac{1}{T} = \biggl ( \frac{\partial S}{\partial E} \biggr )_{N,V} |
93 |
+ |
\label{introEq:SM6} |
94 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
95 |
+ |
The temperature in the system $\gamma$ is then |
96 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
97 |
+ |
\beta( E_{\gamma} ) = \frac{1}{k_B T} = |
98 |
+ |
\frac{\partial \ln \Omega(E_{\gamma})}{\partial E_{\gamma}} |
99 |
+ |
\label{introEq:SM7} |
100 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
101 |
+ |
Applying this to Eq.~\ref{introEq:SM4} gives the following |
102 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
103 |
+ |
\beta( E_{\gamma} ) = \beta( E_{\text{bath}} ) |
104 |
+ |
\label{introEq:SM8} |
105 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
106 |
+ |
Showing that the partitioning of energy between the two systems is |
107 |
+ |
actually a process of thermal equilibration.\cite{Frenkel1996} |
108 |
+ |
|
109 |
+ |
An application of these results is to formulate the form of an |
110 |
+ |
expectation value of an observable, $A$, in the canonical ensemble. In |
111 |
+ |
the canonical ensemble, the number of particles, $N$, the volume, $V$, |
112 |
+ |
and the temperature, $T$, are all held constant while the energy, $E$, |
113 |
+ |
is allowed to fluctuate. Returning to the previous example, the bath |
114 |
+ |
system is now an infinitely large thermal bath, whose exchange of |
115 |
+ |
energy with the system $\gamma$ holds the temperature constant. The |
116 |
+ |
partitioning of energy in the bath system is then related to the total |
117 |
+ |
energy of both systems and the fluctuations in $E_{\gamma}$: |
118 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
119 |
+ |
\Omega( E_{\gamma} ) = \Omega( E - E_{\gamma} ) |
120 |
+ |
\label{introEq:SM9} |
121 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
122 |
+ |
As for the expectation value, it can be defined |
123 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
124 |
+ |
\langle A \rangle = |
125 |
+ |
\int\limits_{\boldsymbol{\Gamma}} d\boldsymbol{\Gamma} |
126 |
+ |
P_{\gamma} A(\boldsymbol{\Gamma}) |
127 |
+ |
\label{introEq:SM10} |
128 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
129 |
+ |
Where $\int\limits_{\boldsymbol{\Gamma}} d\boldsymbol{\Gamma}$ denotes |
130 |
+ |
an integration over all accessible phase space, $P_{\gamma}$ is the |
131 |
+ |
probability of being in a given phase state and |
132 |
+ |
$A(\boldsymbol{\Gamma})$ is some observable that is a function of the |
133 |
+ |
phase state. |
134 |
+ |
|
135 |
+ |
Because entropy seeks to maximize the number of degenerate states at a |
136 |
+ |
given energy, the probability of being in a particular state in |
137 |
+ |
$\gamma$ will be directly proportional to the number of allowable |
138 |
+ |
states the coupled system is able to assume. Namely, |
139 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
140 |
+ |
P_{\gamma} \propto \Omega( E_{\text{bath}} ) = |
141 |
+ |
e^{\ln \Omega( E - E_{\gamma})} |
142 |
+ |
\label{introEq:SM11} |
143 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
144 |
+ |
With $E_{\gamma} \ll E$, $\ln \Omega$ can be expanded in a Taylor series: |
145 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
146 |
+ |
\ln \Omega ( E - E_{\gamma}) = |
147 |
+ |
\ln \Omega (E) - |
148 |
+ |
E_{\gamma} \frac{\partial \ln \Omega }{\partial E} |
149 |
+ |
+ \ldots |
150 |
+ |
\label{introEq:SM12} |
151 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
152 |
+ |
Higher order terms are omitted as $E$ is an infinite thermal |
153 |
+ |
bath. Further, using Eq.~\ref{introEq:SM7}, Eq.~\ref{introEq:SM11} can |
154 |
+ |
be rewritten: |
155 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
156 |
+ |
P_{\gamma} \propto e^{-\beta E_{\gamma}} |
157 |
+ |
\label{introEq:SM13} |
158 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
159 |
+ |
Where $\ln \Omega(E)$ has been factored out of the proportionality as a |
160 |
+ |
constant. Normalizing the probability ($\int\limits_{\boldsymbol{\Gamma}} |
161 |
+ |
d\boldsymbol{\Gamma} P_{\gamma} = 1$) gives |
162 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
163 |
+ |
P_{\gamma} = \frac{e^{-\beta E_{\gamma}}} |
164 |
+ |
{\int\limits_{\boldsymbol{\Gamma}} d\boldsymbol{\Gamma} e^{-\beta E_{\gamma}}} |
165 |
+ |
\label{introEq:SM14} |
166 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
167 |
+ |
This result is the standard Boltzmann statistical distribution. |
168 |
+ |
Applying it to Eq.~\ref{introEq:SM10} one can obtain the following relation for ensemble averages: |
169 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
170 |
+ |
\langle A \rangle = |
171 |
+ |
\frac{\int\limits_{\boldsymbol{\Gamma}} d\boldsymbol{\Gamma} |
172 |
+ |
A( \boldsymbol{\Gamma} ) e^{-\beta E_{\gamma}}} |
173 |
+ |
{\int\limits_{\boldsymbol{\Gamma}} d\boldsymbol{\Gamma} e^{-\beta E_{\gamma}}} |
174 |
+ |
\label{introEq:SM15} |
175 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
176 |
+ |
|
177 |
+ |
\subsection{\label{introSec:ergodic}The Ergodic Hypothesis} |
178 |
+ |
|
179 |
+ |
One last important consideration is that of ergodicity. Ergodicity is |
180 |
+ |
the assumption that given an infinite amount of time, a system will |
181 |
+ |
visit every available point in phase space.\cite{Frenkel1996} For most |
182 |
+ |
systems, this is a valid assumption, except in cases where the system |
183 |
+ |
may be trapped in a local feature (\emph{e.g.}~glasses). When valid, |
184 |
+ |
ergodicity allows the unification of a time averaged observation and |
185 |
+ |
an ensemble averaged one. If an observation is averaged over a |
186 |
+ |
sufficiently long time, the system is assumed to visit all |
187 |
+ |
appropriately available points in phase space, giving a properly |
188 |
+ |
weighted statistical average. This allows the researcher freedom of |
189 |
+ |
choice when deciding how best to measure a given observable. When an |
190 |
+ |
ensemble averaged approach seems most logical, the Monte Carlo |
191 |
+ |
techniques described in Sec.~\ref{introSec:monteCarlo} can be utilized. |
192 |
+ |
Conversely, if a problem lends itself to a time averaging approach, |
193 |
+ |
the Molecular Dynamics techniques in Sec.~\ref{introSec:MD} can be |
194 |
+ |
employed. |
195 |
+ |
|
196 |
+ |
\section{\label{introSec:monteCarlo}Monte Carlo Simulations} |
197 |
+ |
|
198 |
|
The Monte Carlo method was developed by Metropolis and Ulam for their |
199 |
|
work in fissionable material.\cite{metropolis:1949} The method is so |
200 |
|
named, because it heavily uses random numbers in its |
210 |
|
\end{equation} |
211 |
|
The equation can be recast as: |
212 |
|
\begin{equation} |
213 |
< |
I = (b-a)<f(x)> |
213 |
> |
I = (b-a)\langle f(x) \rangle |
214 |
|
\label{eq:MCex2} |
215 |
|
\end{equation} |
216 |
< |
Where $<f(x)>$ is the unweighted average over the interval |
216 |
> |
Where $\langle f(x) \rangle$ is the unweighted average over the interval |
217 |
|
$[a,b]$. The calculation of the integral could then be solved by |
218 |
|
randomly choosing points along the interval $[a,b]$ and calculating |
219 |
|
the value of $f(x)$ at each point. The accumulated average would then |
220 |
< |
approach $I$ in the limit where the number of trials is infintely |
220 |
> |
approach $I$ in the limit where the number of trials is infinitely |
221 |
|
large. |
222 |
|
|
223 |
|
However, in Statistical Mechanics, one is typically interested in |
224 |
|
integrals of the form: |
225 |
|
\begin{equation} |
226 |
< |
<A> = \frac{A}{exp^{-\beta}} |
226 |
> |
\langle A \rangle = \frac{\int d^N \mathbf{r}~A(\mathbf{r}^N)% |
227 |
> |
e^{-\beta V(\mathbf{r}^N)}}% |
228 |
> |
{\int d^N \mathbf{r}~e^{-\beta V(\mathbf{r}^N)}} |
229 |
|
\label{eq:mcEnsAvg} |
230 |
|
\end{equation} |
231 |
< |
Where $r^N$ stands for the coordinates of all $N$ particles and $A$ is |
232 |
< |
some observable that is only dependent on position. $<A>$ is the |
233 |
< |
ensemble average of $A$ as presented in |
234 |
< |
Sec.~\ref{introSec:statThermo}. Because $A$ is independent of |
235 |
< |
momentum, the momenta contribution of the integral can be factored |
236 |
< |
out, leaving the configurational integral. Application of the brute |
237 |
< |
force method to this system would yield highly inefficient |
238 |
< |
results. Due to the Boltzman weighting of this integral, most random |
231 |
> |
Where $\mathbf{r}^N$ stands for the coordinates of all $N$ particles |
232 |
> |
and $A$ is some observable that is only dependent on position. This is |
233 |
> |
the ensemble average of $A$ as presented in |
234 |
> |
Sec.~\ref{introSec:statThermo}, except here $A$ is independent of |
235 |
> |
momentum. Therefore the momenta contribution of the integral can be |
236 |
> |
factored out, leaving the configurational integral. Application of the |
237 |
> |
brute force method to this system would yield highly inefficient |
238 |
> |
results. Due to the Boltzmann weighting of this integral, most random |
239 |
|
configurations will have a near zero contribution to the ensemble |
240 |
< |
average. This is where a importance sampling comes into |
240 |
> |
average. This is where importance sampling comes into |
241 |
|
play.\cite{allen87:csl} |
242 |
|
|
243 |
|
Importance Sampling is a method where one selects a distribution from |
244 |
|
which the random configurations are chosen in order to more |
245 |
|
efficiently calculate the integral.\cite{Frenkel1996} Consider again |
246 |
|
Eq.~\ref{eq:MCex1} rewritten to be: |
247 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
248 |
+ |
I = \int^b_a \frac{f(x)}{\rho(x)} \rho(x) dx |
249 |
+ |
\label{introEq:Importance1} |
250 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
251 |
+ |
Where $\rho(x)$ is an arbitrary probability distribution in $x$. If |
252 |
+ |
one conducts $\tau$ trials selecting a random number, $\zeta_\tau$, |
253 |
+ |
from the distribution $\rho(x)$ on the interval $[a,b]$, then |
254 |
+ |
Eq.~\ref{introEq:Importance1} becomes |
255 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
256 |
+ |
I= \biggl \langle \frac{f(x)}{\rho(x)} \biggr \rangle_{\text{trials}} |
257 |
+ |
\label{introEq:Importance2} |
258 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
259 |
+ |
Looking at Eq.~\ref{eq:mcEnsAvg}, and realizing |
260 |
+ |
\begin {equation} |
261 |
+ |
\rho_{kT}(\mathbf{r}^N) = |
262 |
+ |
\frac{e^{-\beta V(\mathbf{r}^N)}} |
263 |
+ |
{\int d^N \mathbf{r}~e^{-\beta V(\mathbf{r}^N)}} |
264 |
+ |
\label{introEq:MCboltzman} |
265 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
266 |
+ |
Where $\rho_{kT}$ is the Boltzmann distribution. The ensemble average |
267 |
+ |
can be rewritten as |
268 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
269 |
+ |
\langle A \rangle = \int d^N \mathbf{r}~A(\mathbf{r}^N) |
270 |
+ |
\rho_{kT}(\mathbf{r}^N) |
271 |
+ |
\label{introEq:Importance3} |
272 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
273 |
+ |
Applying Eq.~\ref{introEq:Importance1} one obtains |
274 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
275 |
+ |
\langle A \rangle = \biggl \langle |
276 |
+ |
\frac{ A \rho_{kT}(\mathbf{r}^N) } |
277 |
+ |
{\rho(\mathbf{r}^N)} \biggr \rangle_{\text{trials}} |
278 |
+ |
\label{introEq:Importance4} |
279 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
280 |
+ |
By selecting $\rho(\mathbf{r}^N)$ to be $\rho_{kT}(\mathbf{r}^N)$ |
281 |
+ |
Eq.~\ref{introEq:Importance4} becomes |
282 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
283 |
+ |
\langle A \rangle = \langle A(\mathbf{r}^N) \rangle_{\text{trials}} |
284 |
+ |
\label{introEq:Importance5} |
285 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
286 |
+ |
The difficulty is selecting points $\mathbf{r}^N$ such that they are |
287 |
+ |
sampled from the distribution $\rho_{kT}(\mathbf{r}^N)$. A solution |
288 |
+ |
was proposed by Metropolis \emph{et al}.\cite{metropolis:1953} which involved |
289 |
+ |
the use of a Markov chain whose limiting distribution was |
290 |
+ |
$\rho_{kT}(\mathbf{r}^N)$. |
291 |
|
|
292 |
+ |
\subsection{\label{introSec:markovChains}Markov Chains} |
293 |
|
|
294 |
+ |
A Markov chain is a chain of states satisfying the following |
295 |
+ |
conditions:\cite{leach01:mm} |
296 |
+ |
\begin{enumerate} |
297 |
+ |
\item The outcome of each trial depends only on the outcome of the previous trial. |
298 |
+ |
\item Each trial belongs to a finite set of outcomes called the state space. |
299 |
+ |
\end{enumerate} |
300 |
+ |
If given two configurations, $\mathbf{r}^N_m$ and $\mathbf{r}^N_n$, |
301 |
+ |
$\rho_m$ and $\rho_n$ are the probabilities of being in state |
302 |
+ |
$\mathbf{r}^N_m$ and $\mathbf{r}^N_n$ respectively. Further, the two |
303 |
+ |
states are linked by a transition probability, $\pi_{mn}$, which is the |
304 |
+ |
probability of going from state $m$ to state $n$. |
305 |
|
|
306 |
< |
\subsection{\label{introSec:md}Molecular Dynamics Simulations} |
306 |
> |
\newcommand{\accMe}{\operatorname{acc}} |
307 |
|
|
308 |
< |
time averages |
308 |
> |
The transition probability is given by the following: |
309 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
310 |
> |
\pi_{mn} = \alpha_{mn} \times \accMe(m \rightarrow n) |
311 |
> |
\label{introEq:MCpi} |
312 |
> |
\end{equation} |
313 |
> |
Where $\alpha_{mn}$ is the probability of attempting the move $m |
314 |
> |
\rightarrow n$, and $\accMe$ is the probability of accepting the move |
315 |
> |
$m \rightarrow n$. Defining a probability vector, |
316 |
> |
$\boldsymbol{\rho}$, such that |
317 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
318 |
> |
\boldsymbol{\rho} = \{\rho_1, \rho_2, \ldots \rho_m, \rho_n, |
319 |
> |
\ldots \rho_N \} |
320 |
> |
\label{introEq:MCrhoVector} |
321 |
> |
\end{equation} |
322 |
> |
a transition matrix $\boldsymbol{\Pi}$ can be defined, |
323 |
> |
whose elements are $\pi_{mn}$, for each given transition. The |
324 |
> |
limiting distribution of the Markov chain can then be found by |
325 |
> |
applying the transition matrix an infinite number of times to the |
326 |
> |
distribution vector. |
327 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
328 |
> |
\boldsymbol{\rho}_{\text{limit}} = |
329 |
> |
\lim_{N \rightarrow \infty} \boldsymbol{\rho}_{\text{initial}} |
330 |
> |
\boldsymbol{\Pi}^N |
331 |
> |
\label{introEq:MCmarkovLimit} |
332 |
> |
\end{equation} |
333 |
> |
The limiting distribution of the chain is independent of the starting |
334 |
> |
distribution, and successive applications of the transition matrix |
335 |
> |
will only yield the limiting distribution again. |
336 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
337 |
> |
\boldsymbol{\rho}_{\text{limit}} = \boldsymbol{\rho}_{\text{initial}} |
338 |
> |
\boldsymbol{\Pi} |
339 |
> |
\label{introEq:MCmarkovEquil} |
340 |
> |
\end{equation} |
341 |
|
|
342 |
< |
time integrating schemes |
342 |
> |
\subsection{\label{introSec:metropolisMethod}The Metropolis Method} |
343 |
|
|
344 |
< |
time reversible |
344 |
> |
In the Metropolis method\cite{metropolis:1953} |
345 |
> |
Eq.~\ref{introEq:MCmarkovEquil} is solved such that |
346 |
> |
$\boldsymbol{\rho}_{\text{limit}}$ matches the Boltzmann distribution |
347 |
> |
of states. The method accomplishes this by imposing the strong |
348 |
> |
condition of microscopic reversibility on the equilibrium |
349 |
> |
distribution. Meaning, that at equilibrium the probability of going |
350 |
> |
from $m$ to $n$ is the same as going from $n$ to $m$. |
351 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
352 |
> |
\rho_m\pi_{mn} = \rho_n\pi_{nm} |
353 |
> |
\label{introEq:MCmicroReverse} |
354 |
> |
\end{equation} |
355 |
> |
Further, $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$ is chosen to be a symmetric matrix in |
356 |
> |
the Metropolis method. Using Eq.~\ref{introEq:MCpi}, |
357 |
> |
Eq.~\ref{introEq:MCmicroReverse} becomes |
358 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
359 |
> |
\frac{\accMe(m \rightarrow n)}{\accMe(n \rightarrow m)} = |
360 |
> |
\frac{\rho_n}{\rho_m} |
361 |
> |
\label{introEq:MCmicro2} |
362 |
> |
\end{equation} |
363 |
> |
For a Boltzmann limiting distribution, |
364 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
365 |
> |
\frac{\rho_n}{\rho_m} = e^{-\beta[\mathcal{U}(n) - \mathcal{U}(m)]} |
366 |
> |
= e^{-\beta \Delta \mathcal{U}} |
367 |
> |
\label{introEq:MCmicro3} |
368 |
> |
\end{equation} |
369 |
> |
This allows for the following set of acceptance rules be defined: |
370 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
371 |
> |
\accMe( m \rightarrow n ) = |
372 |
> |
\begin{cases} |
373 |
> |
1& \text{if $\Delta \mathcal{U} \leq 0$,} \\ |
374 |
> |
e^{-\beta \Delta \mathcal{U}}& \text{if $\Delta \mathcal{U} > 0$.} |
375 |
> |
\end{cases} |
376 |
> |
\label{introEq:accRules} |
377 |
> |
\end{equation} |
378 |
|
|
379 |
< |
symplectic methods |
379 |
> |
Using the acceptance criteria from Eq.~\ref{introEq:accRules} the |
380 |
> |
Metropolis method proceeds as follows |
381 |
> |
\begin{enumerate} |
382 |
> |
\item Generate an initial configuration $\mathbf{r}^N$ which has some finite probability in $\rho_{kT}$. |
383 |
> |
\item Modify $\mathbf{r}^N$, to generate configuration $\mathbf{r^{\prime}}^N$. |
384 |
> |
\item If the new configuration lowers the energy of the system, accept the move with unity ($\mathbf{r}^N$ becomes $\mathbf{r^{\prime}}^N$). Otherwise accept with probability $e^{-\beta \Delta \mathcal{U}}$. |
385 |
> |
\item Accumulate the average for the configurational observable of interest. |
386 |
> |
\item Repeat from step 2 until the average converges. |
387 |
> |
\end{enumerate} |
388 |
> |
One important note is that the average is accumulated whether the move |
389 |
> |
is accepted or not, this ensures proper weighting of the average. |
390 |
> |
Using Eq.~\ref{introEq:Importance4} it becomes clear that the |
391 |
> |
accumulated averages are the ensemble averages, as this method ensures |
392 |
> |
that the limiting distribution is the Boltzmann distribution. |
393 |
|
|
394 |
< |
Extended ensembles (NVT NPT) |
394 |
> |
\section{\label{introSec:MD}Molecular Dynamics Simulations} |
395 |
|
|
396 |
< |
constrained dynamics |
396 |
> |
The main simulation tool used in this research is Molecular Dynamics. |
397 |
> |
Molecular Dynamics is when the equations of motion for a system are |
398 |
> |
integrated in order to obtain information about both the positions and |
399 |
> |
momentum of a system, allowing the calculation of not only |
400 |
> |
configurational observables, but momenta dependent ones as well: |
401 |
> |
diffusion constants, velocity auto correlations, folding/unfolding |
402 |
> |
events, etc. Due to the principle of ergodicity, |
403 |
> |
Sec.~\ref{introSec:ergodic}, the average of these observables over the |
404 |
> |
time period of the simulation are taken to be the ensemble averages |
405 |
> |
for the system. |
406 |
|
|
407 |
< |
\section{\label{introSec:chapterLayout}Chapter Layout} |
407 |
> |
The choice of when to use molecular dynamics over Monte Carlo |
408 |
> |
techniques, is normally decided by the observables in which the |
409 |
> |
researcher is interested. If the observables depend on momenta in |
410 |
> |
any fashion, then the only choice is molecular dynamics in some form. |
411 |
> |
However, when the observable is dependent only on the configuration, |
412 |
> |
then most of the time Monte Carlo techniques will be more efficient. |
413 |
|
|
414 |
< |
\subsection{\label{introSec:RSA}Random Sequential Adsorption} |
414 |
> |
The focus of research in the second half of this dissertation is |
415 |
> |
centered around the dynamic properties of phospholipid bilayers, |
416 |
> |
making molecular dynamics key in the simulation of those properties. |
417 |
|
|
418 |
< |
\subsection{\label{introSec:OOPSE}The OOPSE Simulation Package} |
418 |
> |
\subsection{\label{introSec:mdAlgorithm}The Molecular Dynamics Algorithm} |
419 |
|
|
420 |
< |
\subsection{\label{introSec:bilayers}A Mesoscale Model for Phospholipid Bilayers} |
420 |
> |
To illustrate how the molecular dynamics technique is applied, the |
421 |
> |
following sections will describe the sequence involved in a |
422 |
> |
simulation. Sec.~\ref{introSec:mdInit} deals with the initialization |
423 |
> |
of a simulation. Sec.~\ref{introSec:mdForce} discusses issues |
424 |
> |
involved with the calculation of the forces. |
425 |
> |
Sec.~\ref{introSec:mdIntegrate} concludes the algorithm discussion |
426 |
> |
with the integration of the equations of motion.\cite{Frenkel1996} |
427 |
> |
|
428 |
> |
\subsection{\label{introSec:mdInit}Initialization} |
429 |
> |
|
430 |
> |
When selecting the initial configuration for the simulation it is |
431 |
> |
important to consider what dynamics one is hoping to observe. |
432 |
> |
Ch.~\ref{chapt:lipid} deals with the formation and equilibrium dynamics of |
433 |
> |
phospholipid membranes. Therefore in these simulations initial |
434 |
> |
positions were selected that in some cases dispersed the lipids in |
435 |
> |
water, and in other cases structured the lipids into performed |
436 |
> |
bilayers. Important considerations at this stage of the simulation are: |
437 |
> |
\begin{itemize} |
438 |
> |
\item There are no major overlaps of molecular or atomic orbitals |
439 |
> |
\item Velocities are chosen in such a way as to not give the system a non=zero total momentum or angular momentum. |
440 |
> |
\item It is also sometimes desirable to select the velocities to correctly sample the target temperature. |
441 |
> |
\end{itemize} |
442 |
> |
|
443 |
> |
The first point is important due to the amount of potential energy |
444 |
> |
generated by having two particles too close together. If overlap |
445 |
> |
occurs, the first evaluation of forces will return numbers so large as |
446 |
> |
to render the numerical integration of the motion meaningless. The |
447 |
> |
second consideration keeps the system from drifting or rotating as a |
448 |
> |
whole. This arises from the fact that most simulations are of systems |
449 |
> |
in equilibrium in the absence of outside forces. Therefore any net |
450 |
> |
movement would be unphysical and an artifact of the simulation method |
451 |
> |
used. The final point addresses the selection of the magnitude of the |
452 |
> |
initial velocities. For many simulations it is convenient to use |
453 |
> |
this opportunity to scale the amount of kinetic energy to reflect the |
454 |
> |
desired thermal distribution of the system. However, it must be noted |
455 |
> |
that most systems will require further velocity rescaling after the |
456 |
> |
first few initial simulation steps due to either loss or gain of |
457 |
> |
kinetic energy from energy stored in potential degrees of freedom. |
458 |
> |
|
459 |
> |
\subsection{\label{introSec:mdForce}Force Evaluation} |
460 |
> |
|
461 |
> |
The evaluation of forces is the most computationally expensive portion |
462 |
> |
of a given molecular dynamics simulation. This is due entirely to the |
463 |
> |
evaluation of long range forces in a simulation, typically pair-wise. |
464 |
> |
These forces are most commonly the Van der Waals force, and sometimes |
465 |
> |
Coulombic forces as well. For a pair-wise force, there are $N(N-1)/ 2$ |
466 |
> |
pairs to be evaluated, where $N$ is the number of particles in the |
467 |
> |
system. This leads to the calculations scaling as $N^2$, making large |
468 |
> |
simulations prohibitive in the absence of any computation saving |
469 |
> |
techniques. |
470 |
> |
|
471 |
> |
Another consideration one must resolve, is that in a given simulation |
472 |
> |
a disproportionate number of the particles will feel the effects of |
473 |
> |
the surface.\cite{allen87:csl} For a cubic system of 1000 particles |
474 |
> |
arranged in a $10 \times 10 \times 10$ cube, 488 particles will be |
475 |
> |
exposed to the surface. Unless one is simulating an isolated particle |
476 |
> |
group in a vacuum, the behavior of the system will be far from the |
477 |
> |
desired bulk characteristics. To offset this, simulations employ the |
478 |
> |
use of periodic boundary images.\cite{born:1912} |
479 |
> |
|
480 |
> |
The technique involves the use of an algorithm that replicates the |
481 |
> |
simulation box on an infinite lattice in Cartesian space. Any given |
482 |
> |
particle leaving the simulation box on one side will have an image of |
483 |
> |
itself enter on the opposite side (see Fig.~\ref{introFig:pbc}). In |
484 |
> |
addition, this sets that any two particles have an image, real or |
485 |
> |
periodic, within $\text{box}/2$ of each other. A discussion of the |
486 |
> |
method used to calculate the periodic image can be found in |
487 |
> |
Sec.\ref{oopseSec:pbc}. |
488 |
> |
|
489 |
> |
\begin{figure} |
490 |
> |
\centering |
491 |
> |
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{pbcFig.eps} |
492 |
> |
\caption[An illustration of periodic boundary conditions]{A 2-D illustration of periodic boundary conditions. As one particle leaves the right of the simulation box, an image of it enters the left.} |
493 |
> |
\label{introFig:pbc} |
494 |
> |
\end{figure} |
495 |
> |
|
496 |
> |
Returning to the topic of the computational scale of the force |
497 |
> |
evaluation, the use of periodic boundary conditions requires that a |
498 |
> |
cutoff radius be employed. Using a cutoff radius improves the |
499 |
> |
efficiency of the force evaluation, as particles farther than a |
500 |
> |
predetermined distance, $r_{\text{cut}}$, are not included in the |
501 |
> |
calculation.\cite{Frenkel1996} In a simulation with periodic images, |
502 |
> |
$r_{\text{cut}}$ has a maximum value of $\text{box}/2$. |
503 |
> |
Fig.~\ref{introFig:rMax} illustrates how when using an |
504 |
> |
$r_{\text{cut}}$ larger than this value, or in the extreme limit of no |
505 |
> |
$r_{\text{cut}}$ at all, the corners of the simulation box are |
506 |
> |
unequally weighted due to the lack of particle images in the $x$, $y$, |
507 |
> |
or $z$ directions past a distance of $\text{box} / 2$. |
508 |
> |
|
509 |
> |
\begin{figure} |
510 |
> |
\centering |
511 |
> |
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{rCutMaxFig.eps} |
512 |
> |
\caption[An explanation of $r_{\text{cut}}$]{The yellow atom has all other images wrapped to itself as the center. If $r_{\text{cut}}=\text{box}/2$, then the distribution is uniform (blue atoms). However, when $r_{\text{cut}}>\text{box}/2$ the corners are disproportionately weighted (green atoms) vs the axial directions (shaded regions).} |
513 |
> |
\label{introFig:rMax} |
514 |
> |
\end{figure} |
515 |
> |
|
516 |
> |
With the use of an $r_{\text{cut}}$, however, comes a discontinuity in |
517 |
> |
the potential energy curve (Fig.~\ref{introFig:shiftPot}). To fix this |
518 |
> |
discontinuity, one calculates the potential energy at the |
519 |
> |
$r_{\text{cut}}$, and adds that value to the potential, causing |
520 |
> |
the function to go smoothly to zero at the cutoff radius. This |
521 |
> |
shifted potential ensures conservation of energy when integrating the |
522 |
> |
Newtonian equations of motion. |
523 |
> |
|
524 |
> |
\begin{figure} |
525 |
> |
\centering |
526 |
> |
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{shiftedPot.eps} |
527 |
> |
\caption[Shifting the Lennard-Jones Potential]{The Lennard-Jones potential (blue line) is shifted (red line) to remove the discontinuity at $r_{\text{cut}}$.} |
528 |
> |
\label{introFig:shiftPot} |
529 |
> |
\end{figure} |
530 |
> |
|
531 |
> |
The second main simplification used in this research is the Verlet |
532 |
> |
neighbor list. \cite{allen87:csl} In the Verlet method, one generates |
533 |
> |
a list of all neighbor atoms, $j$, surrounding atom $i$ within some |
534 |
> |
cutoff $r_{\text{list}}$, where $r_{\text{list}}>r_{\text{cut}}$. |
535 |
> |
This list is created the first time forces are evaluated, then on |
536 |
> |
subsequent force evaluations, pair calculations are only calculated |
537 |
> |
from the neighbor lists. The lists are updated if any given particle |
538 |
> |
in the system moves farther than $r_{\text{list}}-r_{\text{cut}}$, |
539 |
> |
giving rise to the possibility that a particle has left or joined a |
540 |
> |
neighbor list. |
541 |
> |
|
542 |
> |
\subsection{\label{introSec:mdIntegrate} Integration of the equations of motion} |
543 |
> |
|
544 |
> |
A starting point for the discussion of molecular dynamics integrators |
545 |
> |
is the Verlet algorithm.\cite{Frenkel1996} It begins with a Taylor |
546 |
> |
expansion of position in time: |
547 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
548 |
> |
q(t+\Delta t)= q(t) + v(t)\Delta t + \frac{F(t)}{2m}\Delta t^2 + |
549 |
> |
\frac{\Delta t^3}{3!}\frac{\partial q(t)}{\partial t} + |
550 |
> |
\mathcal{O}(\Delta t^4) |
551 |
> |
\label{introEq:verletForward} |
552 |
> |
\end{equation} |
553 |
> |
As well as, |
554 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
555 |
> |
q(t-\Delta t)= q(t) - v(t)\Delta t + \frac{F(t)}{2m}\Delta t^2 - |
556 |
> |
\frac{\Delta t^3}{3!}\frac{\partial q(t)}{\partial t} + |
557 |
> |
\mathcal{O}(\Delta t^4) |
558 |
> |
\label{introEq:verletBack} |
559 |
> |
\end{equation} |
560 |
> |
Where $m$ is the mass of the particle, $q(t)$ is the position at time |
561 |
> |
$t$, $v(t)$ the velocity, and $F(t)$ the force acting on the |
562 |
> |
particle. Adding together Eq.~\ref{introEq:verletForward} and |
563 |
> |
Eq.~\ref{introEq:verletBack} results in, |
564 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
565 |
> |
q(t+\Delta t)+q(t-\Delta t) = |
566 |
> |
2q(t) + \frac{F(t)}{m}\Delta t^2 + \mathcal{O}(\Delta t^4) |
567 |
> |
\label{introEq:verletSum} |
568 |
> |
\end{equation} |
569 |
> |
Or equivalently, |
570 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
571 |
> |
q(t+\Delta t) \approx |
572 |
> |
2q(t) - q(t-\Delta t) + \frac{F(t)}{m}\Delta t^2 |
573 |
> |
\label{introEq:verletFinal} |
574 |
> |
\end{equation} |
575 |
> |
Which contains an error in the estimate of the new positions on the |
576 |
> |
order of $\Delta t^4$. |
577 |
> |
|
578 |
> |
In practice, however, the simulations in this research were integrated |
579 |
> |
with a velocity reformulation of the Verlet method.\cite{allen87:csl} |
580 |
> |
\begin{align} |
581 |
> |
q(t+\Delta t) &= q(t) + v(t)\Delta t + \frac{F(t)}{2m}\Delta t^2 % |
582 |
> |
\label{introEq:MDvelVerletPos} \\% |
583 |
> |
% |
584 |
> |
v(t+\Delta t) &= v(t) + \frac{\Delta t}{2m}[F(t) + F(t+\Delta t)] % |
585 |
> |
\label{introEq:MDvelVerletVel} |
586 |
> |
\end{align} |
587 |
> |
The original Verlet algorithm can be regained by substituting the |
588 |
> |
velocity back into Eq.~\ref{introEq:MDvelVerletPos}. The Verlet |
589 |
> |
formulations are chosen in this research because the algorithms have |
590 |
> |
very little long term drift in energy conservation. Energy |
591 |
> |
conservation in a molecular dynamics simulation is of extreme |
592 |
> |
importance, as it is a measure of how closely one is following the |
593 |
> |
``true'' trajectory with the finite integration scheme. An exact |
594 |
> |
solution to the integration will conserve area in phase space, as well |
595 |
> |
as be reversible in time, that is, the trajectory integrated forward |
596 |
> |
or backwards will exactly match itself. Having a finite algorithm |
597 |
> |
that both conserves area in phase space and is time reversible, |
598 |
> |
therefore increases, but does not guarantee the ``correctness'' or the |
599 |
> |
integrated trajectory. |
600 |
> |
|
601 |
> |
It can be shown,\cite{Frenkel1996} that although the Verlet algorithm |
602 |
> |
does not rigorously preserve the actual Hamiltonian, it does preserve |
603 |
> |
a pseudo-Hamiltonian which shadows the real one in phase space. This |
604 |
> |
pseudo-Hamiltonian is provably area-conserving as well as time |
605 |
> |
reversible. The fact that it shadows the true Hamiltonian in phase |
606 |
> |
space is acceptable in actual simulations as one is interested in the |
607 |
> |
ensemble average of the observable being measured. From the ergodic |
608 |
> |
hypothesis (Sec.~\ref{introSec:statThermo}), it is known that the time |
609 |
> |
average will match the ensemble average, therefore two similar |
610 |
> |
trajectories in phase space should give matching statistical averages. |
611 |
> |
|
612 |
> |
\subsection{\label{introSec:MDfurther}Further Considerations} |
613 |
> |
|
614 |
> |
In the simulations presented in this research, a few additional |
615 |
> |
parameters are needed to describe the motions. The simulations |
616 |
> |
involving water and phospholipids in Ch.~\ref{chapt:lipid} are |
617 |
> |
required to integrate the equations of motions for dipoles on atoms. |
618 |
> |
This involves an additional three parameters be specified for each |
619 |
> |
dipole atom: $\phi$, $\theta$, and $\psi$. These three angles are |
620 |
> |
taken to be the Euler angles, where $\phi$ is a rotation about the |
621 |
> |
$z$-axis, and $\theta$ is a rotation about the new $x$-axis, and |
622 |
> |
$\psi$ is a final rotation about the new $z$-axis (see |
623 |
> |
Fig.~\ref{introFig:eulerAngles}). This sequence of rotations can be |
624 |
> |
accumulated into a single $3 \times 3$ matrix, $\mathbf{A}$, |
625 |
> |
defined as follows: |
626 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
627 |
> |
\mathbf{A} = |
628 |
> |
\begin{bmatrix} |
629 |
> |
\cos\phi\cos\psi-\sin\phi\cos\theta\sin\psi &% |
630 |
> |
\sin\phi\cos\psi+\cos\phi\cos\theta\sin\psi &% |
631 |
> |
\sin\theta\sin\psi \\% |
632 |
> |
% |
633 |
> |
-\cos\phi\sin\psi-\sin\phi\cos\theta\cos\psi &% |
634 |
> |
-\sin\phi\sin\psi+\cos\phi\cos\theta\cos\psi &% |
635 |
> |
\sin\theta\cos\psi \\% |
636 |
> |
% |
637 |
> |
\sin\phi\sin\theta &% |
638 |
> |
-\cos\phi\sin\theta &% |
639 |
> |
\cos\theta |
640 |
> |
\end{bmatrix} |
641 |
> |
\label{introEq:EulerRotMat} |
642 |
> |
\end{equation} |
643 |
> |
|
644 |
> |
The equations of motion for Euler angles can be written down |
645 |
> |
as\cite{allen87:csl} |
646 |
> |
\begin{align} |
647 |
> |
\dot{\phi} &= -\omega^s_x \frac{\sin\phi\cos\theta}{\sin\theta} + |
648 |
> |
\omega^s_y \frac{\cos\phi\cos\theta}{\sin\theta} + |
649 |
> |
\omega^s_z |
650 |
> |
\label{introEq:MDeulerPhi} \\% |
651 |
> |
% |
652 |
> |
\dot{\theta} &= \omega^s_x \cos\phi + \omega^s_y \sin\phi |
653 |
> |
\label{introEq:MDeulerTheta} \\% |
654 |
> |
% |
655 |
> |
\dot{\psi} &= \omega^s_x \frac{\sin\phi}{\sin\theta} - |
656 |
> |
\omega^s_y \frac{\cos\phi}{\sin\theta} |
657 |
> |
\label{introEq:MDeulerPsi} |
658 |
> |
\end{align} |
659 |
> |
Where $\omega^s_i$ is the angular velocity in the lab space frame |
660 |
> |
along Cartesian coordinate $i$. However, a difficulty arises when |
661 |
> |
attempting to integrate Eq.~\ref{introEq:MDeulerPhi} and |
662 |
> |
Eq.~\ref{introEq:MDeulerPsi}. The $\frac{1}{\sin \theta}$ present in |
663 |
> |
both equations means there is a non-physical instability present when |
664 |
> |
$\theta$ is 0 or $\pi$. To correct for this, the simulations integrate |
665 |
> |
the rotation matrix, $\mathbf{A}$, directly, thus avoiding the |
666 |
> |
instability. This method was proposed by Dullweber |
667 |
> |
\emph{et. al.}\cite{Dullweber1997}, and is presented in |
668 |
> |
Sec.~\ref{introSec:MDsymplecticRot}. |
669 |
> |
|
670 |
> |
\subsection{\label{introSec:MDliouville}Liouville Propagator} |
671 |
> |
|
672 |
> |
Before discussing the integration of the rotation matrix, it is |
673 |
> |
necessary to understand the construction of a ``good'' integration |
674 |
> |
scheme. It has been previously |
675 |
> |
discussed(Sec.~\ref{introSec:mdIntegrate}) how it is desirable for an |
676 |
> |
integrator to be symplectic, or time reversible. The following is an |
677 |
> |
outline of the Trotter factorization of the Liouville Propagator as a |
678 |
> |
scheme for generating symplectic integrators.\cite{Tuckerman92} |
679 |
> |
|
680 |
> |
For a system with $f$ degrees of freedom the Liouville operator can be |
681 |
> |
defined as, |
682 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
683 |
> |
iL=\sum^f_{j=1} \biggl [\dot{q}_j\frac{\partial}{\partial q_j} + |
684 |
> |
F_j\frac{\partial}{\partial p_j} \biggr ] |
685 |
> |
\label{introEq:LiouvilleOperator} |
686 |
> |
\end{equation} |
687 |
> |
Here, $q_j$ and $p_j$ are the position and conjugate momenta of a |
688 |
> |
degree of freedom, and $F_j$ is the force on that degree of freedom. |
689 |
> |
$\Gamma$ is defined as the set of all positions and conjugate momenta, |
690 |
> |
$\{q_j,p_j\}$, and the propagator, $U(t)$, is defined |
691 |
> |
\begin {equation} |
692 |
> |
U(t) = e^{iLt} |
693 |
> |
\label{introEq:Lpropagator} |
694 |
> |
\end{equation} |
695 |
> |
This allows the specification of $\Gamma$ at any time $t$ as |
696 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
697 |
> |
\Gamma(t) = U(t)\Gamma(0) |
698 |
> |
\label{introEq:Lp2} |
699 |
> |
\end{equation} |
700 |
> |
It is important to note, $U(t)$ is a unitary operator meaning |
701 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
702 |
> |
U(-t)=U^{-1}(t) |
703 |
> |
\label{introEq:Lp3} |
704 |
> |
\end{equation} |
705 |
> |
|
706 |
> |
Decomposing $L$ into two parts, $iL_1$ and $iL_2$, one can use the |
707 |
> |
Trotter theorem to yield |
708 |
> |
\begin{align} |
709 |
> |
e^{iLt} &= e^{i(L_1 + L_2)t} \notag \\% |
710 |
> |
% |
711 |
> |
&= \biggl [ e^{i(L_1 +L_2)\frac{t}{P}} \biggr]^P \notag \\% |
712 |
> |
% |
713 |
> |
&= \biggl [ e^{iL_1\frac{\Delta t}{2}}\, e^{iL_2\Delta t}\, |
714 |
> |
e^{iL_1\frac{\Delta t}{2}} \biggr ]^P + |
715 |
> |
\mathcal{O}\biggl (\frac{t^3}{P^2} \biggr ) \label{introEq:Lp4} |
716 |
> |
\end{align} |
717 |
> |
Where $\Delta t = t/P$. |
718 |
> |
With this, a discrete time operator $G(\Delta t)$ can be defined: |
719 |
> |
\begin{align} |
720 |
> |
G(\Delta t) &= e^{iL_1\frac{\Delta t}{2}}\, e^{iL_2\Delta t}\, |
721 |
> |
e^{iL_1\frac{\Delta t}{2}} \notag \\% |
722 |
> |
% |
723 |
> |
&= U_1 \biggl ( \frac{\Delta t}{2} \biggr )\, U_2 ( \Delta t )\, |
724 |
> |
U_1 \biggl ( \frac{\Delta t}{2} \biggr ) |
725 |
> |
\label{introEq:Lp5} |
726 |
> |
\end{align} |
727 |
> |
Because $U_1(t)$ and $U_2(t)$ are unitary, $G(\Delta t)$ is also |
728 |
> |
unitary. Meaning an integrator based on this factorization will be |
729 |
> |
reversible in time. |
730 |
> |
|
731 |
> |
As an example, consider the following decomposition of $L$: |
732 |
> |
\begin{align} |
733 |
> |
iL_1 &= \dot{q}\frac{\partial}{\partial q}% |
734 |
> |
\label{introEq:Lp6a} \\% |
735 |
> |
% |
736 |
> |
iL_2 &= F(q)\frac{\partial}{\partial p}% |
737 |
> |
\label{introEq:Lp6b} |
738 |
> |
\end{align} |
739 |
> |
This leads to propagator $G( \Delta t )$ as, |
740 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
741 |
> |
G(\Delta t) = e^{\frac{\Delta t}{2} F(q)\frac{\partial}{\partial p}} \, |
742 |
> |
e^{\Delta t\,\dot{q}\frac{\partial}{\partial q}} \, |
743 |
> |
e^{\frac{\Delta t}{2} F(q)\frac{\partial}{\partial p}} |
744 |
> |
\label{introEq:Lp7} |
745 |
> |
\end{equation} |
746 |
> |
Operating $G(\Delta t)$ on $\Gamma(0)$, and utilizing the operator property |
747 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
748 |
> |
e^{c\frac{\partial}{\partial x}}\, f(x) = f(x+c) |
749 |
> |
\label{introEq:Lp8} |
750 |
> |
\end{equation} |
751 |
> |
Where $c$ is independent of $x$. One obtains the following: |
752 |
> |
\begin{align} |
753 |
> |
\dot{q}\biggl (\frac{\Delta t}{2}\biggr ) &= |
754 |
> |
\dot{q}(0) + \frac{\Delta t}{2m}\, F[q(0)] \label{introEq:Lp9a}\\% |
755 |
> |
% |
756 |
> |
q(\Delta t) &= q(0) + \Delta t\, \dot{q}\biggl (\frac{\Delta t}{2}\biggr )% |
757 |
> |
\label{introEq:Lp9b}\\% |
758 |
> |
% |
759 |
> |
\dot{q}(\Delta t) &= \dot{q}\biggl (\frac{\Delta t}{2}\biggr ) + |
760 |
> |
\frac{\Delta t}{2m}\, F[q(0)] \label{introEq:Lp9c} |
761 |
> |
\end{align} |
762 |
> |
Or written another way, |
763 |
> |
\begin{align} |
764 |
> |
q(t+\Delta t) &= q(0) + \dot{q}(0)\Delta t + |
765 |
> |
\frac{F[q(0)]}{m}\frac{\Delta t^2}{2} % |
766 |
> |
\label{introEq:Lp10a} \\% |
767 |
> |
% |
768 |
> |
\dot{q}(\Delta t) &= \dot{q}(0) + \frac{\Delta t}{2m} |
769 |
> |
\biggl [F[q(0)] + F[q(\Delta t)] \biggr] % |
770 |
> |
\label{introEq:Lp10b} |
771 |
> |
\end{align} |
772 |
> |
This is the velocity Verlet formulation presented in |
773 |
> |
Sec.~\ref{introSec:mdIntegrate}. Because this integration scheme is |
774 |
> |
comprised of unitary propagators, it is symplectic, and therefore area |
775 |
> |
preserving in phase space. From the preceding factorization, one can |
776 |
> |
see that the integration of the equations of motion would follow: |
777 |
> |
\begin{enumerate} |
778 |
> |
\item calculate the velocities at the half step, $\frac{\Delta t}{2}$, from the forces calculated at the initial position. |
779 |
> |
|
780 |
> |
\item Use the half step velocities to move positions one whole step, $\Delta t$. |
781 |
> |
|
782 |
> |
\item Evaluate the forces at the new positions, $\mathbf{r}(\Delta t)$, and use the new forces to complete the velocity move. |
783 |
> |
|
784 |
> |
\item Repeat from step 1 with the new position, velocities, and forces assuming the roles of the initial values. |
785 |
> |
\end{enumerate} |
786 |
> |
|
787 |
> |
\subsection{\label{introSec:MDsymplecticRot} Symplectic Propagation of the Rotation Matrix} |
788 |
> |
|
789 |
> |
Based on the factorization from the previous section, |
790 |
> |
Dullweber\emph{et al}.\cite{Dullweber1997}~ proposed a scheme for the |
791 |
> |
symplectic propagation of the rotation matrix, $\mathbf{A}$, as an |
792 |
> |
alternative method for the integration of orientational degrees of |
793 |
> |
freedom. The method starts with a straightforward splitting of the |
794 |
> |
Liouville operator: |
795 |
> |
\begin{align} |
796 |
> |
iL_{\text{pos}} &= \dot{q}\frac{\partial}{\partial q} + |
797 |
> |
\mathbf{\dot{A}}\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{A}} |
798 |
> |
\label{introEq:SR1a} \\% |
799 |
> |
% |
800 |
> |
iL_F &= F(q)\frac{\partial}{\partial p} |
801 |
> |
\label{introEq:SR1b} \\% |
802 |
> |
iL_{\tau} &= \tau(\mathbf{A})\frac{\partial}{\partial \pi} |
803 |
> |
\label{introEq:SR1b} \\% |
804 |
> |
\end{align} |
805 |
> |
Where $\tau(\mathbf{A})$ is the torque of the system |
806 |
> |
due to the configuration, and $\pi$ is the conjugate |
807 |
> |
angular momenta of the system. The propagator, $G(\Delta t)$, becomes |
808 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
809 |
> |
G(\Delta t) = e^{\frac{\Delta t}{2} F(q)\frac{\partial}{\partial p}} \, |
810 |
> |
e^{\frac{\Delta t}{2} \tau(\mathbf{A})\frac{\partial}{\partial \pi}} \, |
811 |
> |
e^{\Delta t\,iL_{\text{pos}}} \, |
812 |
> |
e^{\frac{\Delta t}{2} \tau(\mathbf{A})\frac{\partial}{\partial \pi}} \, |
813 |
> |
e^{\frac{\Delta t}{2} F(q)\frac{\partial}{\partial p}} |
814 |
> |
\label{introEq:SR2} |
815 |
> |
\end{equation} |
816 |
> |
Propagation of the linear and angular momenta follows as in the Verlet |
817 |
> |
scheme. The propagation of positions also follows the Verlet scheme |
818 |
> |
with the addition of a further symplectic splitting of the rotation |
819 |
> |
matrix propagation, $\mathcal{U}_{\text{rot}}(\Delta t)$, within |
820 |
> |
$U_{\text{pos}}(\Delta t)$. |
821 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
822 |
> |
\mathcal{U}_{\text{rot}}(\Delta t) = |
823 |
> |
\mathcal{U}_x \biggl(\frac{\Delta t}{2}\biggr)\, |
824 |
> |
\mathcal{U}_y \biggl(\frac{\Delta t}{2}\biggr)\, |
825 |
> |
\mathcal{U}_z (\Delta t)\, |
826 |
> |
\mathcal{U}_y \biggl(\frac{\Delta t}{2}\biggr)\, |
827 |
> |
\mathcal{U}_x \biggl(\frac{\Delta t}{2}\biggr)\, |
828 |
> |
\label{introEq:SR3} |
829 |
> |
\end{equation} |
830 |
> |
Where $\mathcal{U}_j$ is a unitary rotation of $\mathbf{A}$ and |
831 |
> |
$\pi$ about each axis $j$. As all propagations are now |
832 |
> |
unitary and symplectic, the entire integration scheme is also |
833 |
> |
symplectic and time reversible. |
834 |
> |
|
835 |
> |
\section{\label{introSec:layout}Dissertation Layout} |
836 |
> |
|
837 |
> |
This dissertation is divided as follows:Ch.~\ref{chapt:RSA} |
838 |
> |
presents the random sequential adsorption simulations of related |
839 |
> |
pthalocyanines on a gold (111) surface. Ch.~\ref{chapt:OOPSE} |
840 |
> |
is about the writing of the molecular dynamics simulation package |
841 |
> |
{\sc oopse}. Ch.~\ref{chapt:lipid} regards the simulations of |
842 |
> |
phospholipid bilayers using a mesoscale model. And lastly, |
843 |
> |
Ch.~\ref{chapt:conclusion} concludes this dissertation with a |
844 |
> |
summary of all results. The chapters are arranged in chronological |
845 |
> |
order, and reflect the progression of techniques I employed during my |
846 |
> |
research. |
847 |
> |
|
848 |
> |
The chapter concerning random sequential adsorption simulations is a |
849 |
> |
study in applying Statistical Mechanics simulation techniques in order |
850 |
> |
to obtain a simple model capable of explaining the results. My |
851 |
> |
advisor, Dr. Gezelter, and I were approached by a colleague, |
852 |
> |
Dr. Lieberman, about possible explanations for the partial coverage of a |
853 |
> |
gold surface by a particular compound of hers. We suggested it might |
854 |
> |
be due to the statistical packing fraction of disks on a plane, and |
855 |
> |
set about to simulate this system. As the events in our model were |
856 |
> |
not dynamic in nature, a Monte Carlo method was employed. Here, if a |
857 |
> |
molecule landed on the surface without overlapping another, then its |
858 |
> |
landing was accepted. However, if there was overlap, the landing we |
859 |
> |
rejected and a new random landing location was chosen. This defined |
860 |
> |
our acceptance rules and allowed us to construct a Markov chain whose |
861 |
> |
limiting distribution was the surface coverage in which we were |
862 |
> |
interested. |
863 |
> |
|
864 |
> |
The following chapter, about the simulation package {\sc oopse}, |
865 |
> |
describes in detail the large body of scientific code that had to be |
866 |
> |
written in order to study phospholipid bilayers. Although there are |
867 |
> |
pre-existing molecular dynamic simulation packages available, none |
868 |
> |
were capable of implementing the models we were developing.{\sc oopse} |
869 |
> |
is a unique package capable of not only integrating the equations of |
870 |
> |
motion in Cartesian space, but is also able to integrate the |
871 |
> |
rotational motion of rigid bodies and dipoles. Add to this the |
872 |
> |
ability to perform calculations across parallel processors and a |
873 |
> |
flexible script syntax for creating systems, and {\sc oopse} becomes a |
874 |
> |
very powerful scientific instrument for the exploration of our model. |
875 |
> |
|
876 |
> |
Bringing us to Ch.~\ref{chapt:lipid}. Using {\sc oopse}, I have been |
877 |
> |
able to parameterize a mesoscale model for phospholipid simulations. |
878 |
> |
This model retains information about solvent ordering around the |
879 |
> |
bilayer, as well as information regarding the interaction of the |
880 |
> |
phospholipid head groups' dipoles with each other and the surrounding |
881 |
> |
solvent. These simulations give us insight into the dynamic events |
882 |
> |
that lead to the formation of phospholipid bilayers, as well as |
883 |
> |
provide the foundation for future exploration of bilayer phase |
884 |
> |
behavior with this model. |
885 |
> |
|
886 |
> |
Which leads into the last chapter, where I discuss future directions |
887 |
> |
for both{\sc oopse} and this mesoscale model. Additionally, I will |
888 |
> |
give a summary of results for this dissertation. |
889 |
> |
|
890 |
> |
|