9 |
|
element, or be used for collections of atoms such as a methyl |
10 |
|
group. The atoms are also capable of having a directional component |
11 |
|
associated with them, often in the form of a dipole. Charges on atoms |
12 |
< |
are not currently suporrted by {\sc oopse}. |
12 |
> |
are not currently suported by {\sc oopse}. |
13 |
|
|
14 |
|
The second most basic building block of a simulation is the |
15 |
< |
molecule. The molecule is a way for {\sc oopse} to keep track of the atoms |
16 |
< |
in a simulation in logical manner. This particular unit will store the |
17 |
< |
identities of all the atoms associated with itself and is responsible |
18 |
< |
for the evaluation of its own bonded interaction (i.e.~bonds, bends, |
19 |
< |
and torsions). |
15 |
> |
molecule. The molecule is a way for {\sc oopse} to keep track of the |
16 |
> |
atoms in a simulation in logical manner. This particular unit will |
17 |
> |
store the identities of all the atoms associated with itself and is |
18 |
> |
responsible for the evaluation of its own bonded interaction |
19 |
> |
(i.e.~bonds, bends, and torsions). |
20 |
|
|
21 |
< |
As stated in the previously, one of the features that sets OOPSE apart |
21 |
> |
As stated previously, one of the features that sets {\sc OOPSE} apart |
22 |
|
from most of the current molecular simulation packages is the ability |
23 |
|
to handle rigid body dynamics. Rigid bodies are non-spherical |
24 |
|
particles or collections of particles that have a constant internal |
25 |
|
potential and move collectively.\cite{Goldstein01} They are not |
26 |
< |
included in many standard simulation packages because of the need to |
26 |
> |
included in most simulation packages because of the need to |
27 |
|
consider orientational degrees of freedom and include an integrator |
28 |
|
that accurately propagates these motions in time. |
29 |
|
|
31 |
|
torque applied by the surroundings, which directly affect the |
32 |
|
translation and rotation in turn. In order to accumulate the total |
33 |
|
force on a rigid body, the external forces must first be calculated |
34 |
< |
for all the interal particles. The total force on the rigid body is |
34 |
> |
for all the internal particles. The total force on the rigid body is |
35 |
|
simply the sum of these external forces. Accumulation of the total |
36 |
< |
torque on the rigid body is similar to the force in that it is a sum |
37 |
< |
of the torque applied on each internal particle, mapped onto the |
38 |
< |
center of mass of the rigid body. |
36 |
> |
torque on the rigid body is more complex than the force in that it is |
37 |
> |
the torque applied on the center of mass that dictates rotational |
38 |
> |
motion. The summation of this torque is given by |
39 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
40 |
> |
\mathbf{\tau}_i= |
41 |
> |
\sum_{a}(\mathbf{r}_{ia}-\mathbf{r}_i)\times \mathbf{f}_{ia}, |
42 |
> |
\label{eq:torqueAccumulate} |
43 |
> |
\end{equation} |
44 |
> |
where $\mathbf{\tau}_i$ and $\mathbf{r}_i$ are the torque about and |
45 |
> |
position of the center of mass respectively, while $\mathbf{f}_{ia}$ |
46 |
> |
and $\mathbf{r}_{ia}$ are the force on and position of the component |
47 |
> |
particles of the rigid body.\cite{allen87:csl} |
48 |
|
|
49 |
|
The application of the total torque is done in the body fixed axis of |
50 |
|
the rigid body. In order to move between the space fixed and body |
51 |
< |
fixed coordinate axes, parameters describing the orientation be |
52 |
< |
maintained for each rigid body. At a minimum, the rotation matrix can |
53 |
< |
be described and propagated by the three Euler |
54 |
< |
angles.\cite{Goldstein01} In order to avoid rotational limitations |
55 |
< |
when using Euler angles, the four parameter ``quaternion'' scheme can |
56 |
< |
be used instead.\cite{allen87:csl} Use of quaternions also leads to |
57 |
< |
performance enhancements, particularly for very small |
58 |
< |
systems.\cite{Evans77} OOPSE utilizes a relatively new scheme that |
59 |
< |
propagates the entire nine parameter rotation matrix. Further |
60 |
< |
discussion on this choice can be found in Sec.~\ref{sec:integrate}. |
51 |
> |
fixed coordinate axes, parameters describing the orientation must be |
52 |
> |
maintained for each rigid body. At a minimum, the rotation matrix |
53 |
> |
(\textbf{A}) can be described and propagated by the three Euler angles |
54 |
> |
($\phi, \theta, \text{and} \psi$), where \textbf{A} is composed of |
55 |
> |
trigonometric operations involving $\phi, \theta,$ and |
56 |
> |
$\psi$.\cite{Goldstein01} In order to avoid rotational limitations |
57 |
> |
inherent in using the Euler angles, the four parameter ``quaternion'' |
58 |
> |
scheme can be used instead, where \textbf{A} is composed of arithmetic |
59 |
> |
operations involving the four components of a quaternion ($q_0, q_1, |
60 |
> |
q_2, \text{and} q_3$).\cite{allen87:csl} Use of quaternions also leads |
61 |
> |
to performance enhancements, particularly for very small |
62 |
> |
systems.\cite{Evans77} |
63 |
|
|
64 |
+ |
{\sc OOPSE} utilizes a relatively new scheme that uses the entire nine |
65 |
+ |
parameter rotation matrix internally. Further discussion on this |
66 |
+ |
choice can be found in Sec.~\ref{sec:integrate}. |
67 |
+ |
|
68 |
|
\subsection{\label{sec:LJPot}The Lennard Jones Potential} |
69 |
|
|
70 |
|
The most basic force field implemented in OOPSE is the Lennard-Jones |
71 |
< |
potential. The Lennard-Jones potential mimics the attractive forces |
72 |
< |
two charge neutral particles experience when spontaneous dipoles are |
73 |
< |
induced on each other. This is the predominant intermolecular force in |
59 |
< |
systems of such as noble gases and simple alkanes. |
60 |
< |
|
61 |
< |
The Lennard-Jones potential is given by: |
71 |
> |
potential. The Lennard-Jones potential. Which mimics the Van der Waals |
72 |
> |
interaction at long distances, and uses an emperical repulsion at |
73 |
> |
short distances. The Lennard-Jones potential is given by: |
74 |
|
\begin{equation} |
75 |
|
V_{\text{LJ}}(r_{ij}) = |
76 |
|
4\epsilon_{ij} \biggl[ |
79 |
|
\biggr] |
80 |
|
\label{eq:lennardJonesPot} |
81 |
|
\end{equation} |
82 |
< |
Where $r_ij$ is the distance between particle $i$ and $j$, $\sigma_{ij}$ |
83 |
< |
scales the length of the interaction, and $\epsilon_{ij}$ scales the |
84 |
< |
energy well depth of the potential. |
82 |
> |
Where $r_{ij}$ is the distance between particle $i$ and $j$, |
83 |
> |
$\sigma_{ij}$ scales the length of the interaction, and |
84 |
> |
$\epsilon_{ij}$ scales the well depth of the potential. |
85 |
|
|
86 |
< |
Because the potential is calculated between all pairs, the force |
86 |
> |
Because this potential is calculated between all pairs, the force |
87 |
|
evaluation can become computationally expensive for large systems. To |
88 |
< |
keep the pair evaluation to a manegable number, OOPSE employs the use |
89 |
< |
of a cut-off radius.\cite{allen87:csl} The cutoff radius is set to be |
90 |
< |
$2.5\sigma_{ii}$, where $\sigma_{ii}$ is the largest self self length |
88 |
> |
keep the pair evaluation to a manegable number, OOPSE employs a |
89 |
> |
cut-off radius.\cite{allen87:csl} The cutoff radius is set to be |
90 |
> |
$2.5\sigma_{ii}$, where $\sigma_{ii}$ is the largest Lennard-Jones length |
91 |
|
parameter in the system. Truncating the calculation at |
92 |
|
$r_{\text{cut}}$ introduces a discontinuity into the potential |
93 |
|
energy. To offset this discontinuity, the energy value at |
94 |
|
$r_{\text{cut}}$ is subtracted from the entire potential. This causes |
95 |
< |
the equation to go to zero at the cut-off radius. |
95 |
> |
the potential to go to zero at the cut-off radius. |
96 |
|
|
97 |
|
Interactions between dissimilar particles requires the generation of |
98 |
|
cross term parameters for $\sigma$ and $\epsilon$. These are |
111 |
|
|
112 |
|
\subsection{\label{sec:DUFF}Dipolar Unified-Atom Force Field} |
113 |
|
|
114 |
< |
The \underline{D}ipolar \underline{U}nified-Atom |
115 |
< |
\underline{F}orce \underline{F}ield ({\sc duff}) was developed to |
104 |
< |
simulate lipid bilayers. We needed a model capable of forming |
114 |
> |
The Dipolar Unified-atom Force Field ({\sc duff}) was developed to |
115 |
> |
simulate lipid bilayers. The systems require a model capable of forming |
116 |
|
bilayers, while still being sufficiently computationally efficient to |
117 |
|
allow simulations of large systems ($\approx$100's of phospholipids, |
118 |
|
$\approx$1000's of waters) for long times ($\approx$10's of |
119 |
|
nanoseconds). |
120 |
|
|
121 |
< |
With this goal in mind, we have eliminated all point charges. Charge |
122 |
< |
distributions were replaced with dipoles, and charge-neutral |
123 |
< |
distributions were reduced to Lennard-Jones interaction sites. This |
121 |
> |
With this goal in mind, {\sc duff} has no point charges. Charge |
122 |
> |
neutral distributions were replaced with dipoles, while most atoms and |
123 |
> |
groups of atoms were reduced to Lennard-Jones interaction sites. This |
124 |
|
simplification cuts the length scale of long range interactions from |
125 |
|
$\frac{1}{r}$ to $\frac{1}{r^3}$, allowing us to avoid the |
126 |
< |
computationally expensive Ewald-Sum. Instead, we can use |
127 |
< |
neighbor-lists and cutoff radii for the dipolar interactions. |
126 |
> |
computationally expensive Ewald sum. Instead, we can use |
127 |
> |
neighbor-lists, reaction field, and cutoff radii for the dipolar |
128 |
> |
interactions. |
129 |
|
|
130 |
< |
As an example, lipid head groups in {\sc duff} are represented as point |
131 |
< |
dipole interaction sites.PC and PE Lipid head groups are typically |
132 |
< |
zwitterionic in nature, with charges separated by as much as |
133 |
< |
6~$\mbox{\AA}$. By placing a dipole of 20.6~Debye at the head group |
134 |
< |
center of mass, our model mimics the head group of PC.\cite{Cevc87} |
135 |
< |
Additionally, a Lennard-Jones site is located at the |
136 |
< |
pseudoatom's center of mass. The model is illustrated by the dark grey |
137 |
< |
atom in Fig.~\ref{fig:lipidModel}. |
130 |
> |
As an example, lipid head-groups in {\sc duff} are represented as |
131 |
> |
point dipole interaction sites. By placing a dipole of 20.6~Debye at |
132 |
> |
the head group center of mass, our model mimics the head group of |
133 |
> |
phosphatidylcholine.\cite{Cevc87} Additionally, a Lennard-Jones site |
134 |
> |
is located at the pseudoatom's center of mass. The model is |
135 |
> |
illustrated by the dark grey atom in Fig.~\ref{fig:lipidModel}. The water model we use to complement the dipoles of the lipids is out |
136 |
> |
repaarameterization of the soft sticky dipole (SSD) model of Ichiye |
137 |
> |
\emph{et al.}\cite{liu96:new_model} |
138 |
|
|
139 |
|
\begin{figure} |
140 |
+ |
\epsfxsize=\linewidth |
141 |
|
\epsfbox{lipidModel.eps} |
142 |
|
\caption{A representation of the lipid model. $\phi$ is the torsion angle, $\theta$ % |
143 |
< |
is the bend angle, $\mu$ is the dipole moment of the head group, and n is the chain length.} |
143 |
> |
is the bend angle, $\mu$ is the dipole moment of the head group, and n |
144 |
> |
is the chain length.} |
145 |
|
\label{fig:lipidModel} |
146 |
|
\end{figure} |
147 |
|
|
134 |
– |
The water model we use to complement the dipoles of the lipids is |
135 |
– |
the soft sticky dipole (SSD) model of Ichiye \emph{et |
136 |
– |
al.}\cite{liu96:new_model} This model is discussed in greater detail |
137 |
– |
in Sec.~\ref{sec:SSD}. In all cases we reduce water to a single |
138 |
– |
Lennard-Jones interaction site. The site also contains a dipole to |
139 |
– |
mimic the partial charges on the hydrogens and the oxygen. However, |
140 |
– |
what makes the SSD model unique is the inclusion of a tetrahedral |
141 |
– |
short range potential to recover the hydrogen bonding of water, an |
142 |
– |
important factor when modeling bilayers, as it has been shown that |
143 |
– |
hydrogen bond network formation is a leading contribution to the |
144 |
– |
entropic driving force towards lipid bilayer formation.\cite{Cevc87} |
145 |
– |
|
146 |
– |
|
148 |
|
Turning to the tails of the phospholipids, we have used a set of |
149 |
|
scalable parameters to model the alkyl groups with Lennard-Jones |
150 |
|
sites. For this, we have used the TraPPE force field of Siepmann |
170 |
|
The total energy of function in {\sc duff} is given by the following: |
171 |
|
\begin{equation} |
172 |
|
V_{\text{Total}} = \sum^{N}_{I=1} V^{I}_{\text{Internal}} |
173 |
< |
+ \sum^{N}_{I=1} \sum^{N}_{J=1} V^{IJ}_{\text{Cross}} |
173 |
> |
+ \sum^{N}_{I=1} \sum_{J>I} V^{IJ}_{\text{Cross}} |
174 |
|
\label{eq:totalPotential} |
175 |
|
\end{equation} |
176 |
|
Where $V^{I}_{\text{Internal}}$ is the internal potential of a molecule: |
177 |
|
\begin{equation} |
178 |
|
V^{I}_{\text{Internal}} = |
179 |
|
\sum_{\theta_{ijk} \in I} V_{\text{bend}}(\theta_{ijk}) |
180 |
< |
+ \sum_{\phi_{ijkl} \in I} V_{\text{torsion}}(\theta_{ijkl}) |
180 |
> |
+ \sum_{\phi_{ijkl} \in I} V_{\text{torsion}}(\phi_{ijkl}) |
181 |
|
+ \sum_{i \in I} \sum_{(j>i+4) \in I} |
182 |
|
\biggl[ V_{\text{LJ}}(r_{ij}) + V_{\text{dipole}} |
183 |
|
(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j}) |
185 |
|
\label{eq:internalPotential} |
186 |
|
\end{equation} |
187 |
|
Here $V_{\text{bend}}$ is the bend potential for all 1, 3 bonded pairs |
188 |
< |
within in the molecule. $V_{\text{torsion}}$ is the torsion The |
189 |
< |
pairwise portions of the internal potential are excluded for pairs |
190 |
< |
that ar closer than three bonds, i.e.~atom pairs farther away than a |
191 |
< |
torsion are included in the pair-wise loop. |
188 |
> |
within the molecule, and $V_{\text{torsion}}$ is the torsion potential |
189 |
> |
for all 1, 4 bonded pairs. The pairwise portions of the internal |
190 |
> |
potential are excluded for pairs that are closer than three bonds, |
191 |
> |
i.e.~atom pairs farther away than a torsion are included in the |
192 |
> |
pair-wise loop. |
193 |
|
|
192 |
– |
The cross portion of the total potential, $V^{IJ}_{\text{Cross}}$, is |
193 |
– |
as follows: |
194 |
– |
\begin{equation} |
195 |
– |
V^{IJ}_{\text{Cross}} = |
196 |
– |
\sum_{i \in I} \sum_{j \in J} |
197 |
– |
\biggl[ V_{\text{LJ}}(r_{ij}) + V_{\text{dipole}} |
198 |
– |
(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j}) |
199 |
– |
+ V_{\text{sticky}} |
200 |
– |
(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j}) |
201 |
– |
\biggr] |
202 |
– |
\label{eq:crossPotentail} |
203 |
– |
\end{equation} |
204 |
– |
Where $V_{\text{LJ}}$ is the Lennard Jones potential, |
205 |
– |
$V_{\text{dipole}}$ is the dipole dipole potential, and |
206 |
– |
$V_{\text{sticky}}$ is the sticky potential defined by the SSD model. |
194 |
|
|
195 |
|
The bend potential of a molecule is represented by the following function: |
196 |
|
\begin{equation} |
205 |
|
The torsion potential and parameters are also taken from TraPPE. It is |
206 |
|
of the form: |
207 |
|
\begin{equation} |
208 |
< |
V_{\text{torsion}}(\phi_{ijkl}) = c_1[1 + \cos \phi] |
208 |
> |
V_{\text{torsion}}(\phi) = c_1[1 + \cos \phi] |
209 |
|
+ c_2[1 + \cos(2\phi)] |
210 |
|
+ c_3[1 + \cos(3\phi)] |
211 |
|
\label{eq:origTorsionPot} |
212 |
|
\end{equation} |
213 |
|
Here $\phi_{ijkl}$ is the angle defined by four bonded neighbors $i$, |
214 |
< |
$j$, $k$, and $l$ (again, see Fig.~\ref{fig:lipidModel}). However, |
215 |
< |
for computaional efficency, the torsion potentail has been recast |
216 |
< |
after the method of CHARMM\cite{charmm1983} whereby the angle series |
217 |
< |
is converted to a power series of the form: |
214 |
> |
$j$, $k$, and $l$ (again, see Fig.~\ref{fig:lipidModel}). For |
215 |
> |
computaional efficency, the torsion potential has been recast after |
216 |
> |
the method of CHARMM\cite{charmm1983} whereby the angle series is |
217 |
> |
converted to a power series of the form: |
218 |
|
\begin{equation} |
219 |
|
V_{\text{torsion}}(\phi_{ijkl}) = |
220 |
|
k_3 \cos^3 \phi + k_2 \cos^2 \phi + k_1 \cos \phi + k_0 |
231 |
|
evaluations are avoided during the calculation of the potential. |
232 |
|
|
233 |
|
|
234 |
+ |
The cross portion of the total potential, $V^{IJ}_{\text{Cross}}$, is |
235 |
+ |
as follows: |
236 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
237 |
+ |
V^{IJ}_{\text{Cross}} = |
238 |
+ |
\sum_{i \in I} \sum_{j \in J} |
239 |
+ |
\biggl[ V_{\text{LJ}}(r_{ij}) + V_{\text{dipole}} |
240 |
+ |
(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j}) |
241 |
+ |
+ V_{\text{sticky}} |
242 |
+ |
(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j}) |
243 |
+ |
\biggr] |
244 |
+ |
\label{eq:crossPotentail} |
245 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
246 |
+ |
Where $V_{\text{LJ}}$ is the Lennard Jones potential, |
247 |
+ |
$V_{\text{dipole}}$ is the dipole dipole potential, and |
248 |
+ |
$V_{\text{sticky}}$ is the sticky potential defined by the SSD |
249 |
+ |
model. Note that not all atom types include all interactions. |
250 |
|
|
251 |
|
The dipole-dipole potential has the following form: |
252 |
|
\begin{equation} |
253 |
|
V_{\text{dipole}}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i}, |
254 |
< |
\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j}) = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_{0}} \biggl[ |
255 |
< |
\frac{\boldsymbol{\mu}_{i} \cdot \boldsymbol{\mu}_{j}}{r^{3}_{ij}} |
254 |
> |
\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j}) = \frac{|\mu_i||\mu_j|}{4\pi\epsilon_{0}r_{ij}^{3}} \biggl[ |
255 |
> |
\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}_{i} \cdot \boldsymbol{\hat{u}}_{j} |
256 |
|
- |
257 |
< |
\frac{3(\boldsymbol{\mu}_i \cdot \mathbf{r}_{ij}) % |
258 |
< |
(\boldsymbol{\mu}_j \cdot \mathbf{r}_{ij}) } |
259 |
< |
{r^{5}_{ij}} \biggr] |
257 |
> |
\frac{3(\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}_i \cdot \mathbf{r}_{ij}) % |
258 |
> |
(\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}_j \cdot \mathbf{r}_{ij}) } |
259 |
> |
{r^{2}_{ij}} \biggr] |
260 |
|
\label{eq:dipolePot} |
261 |
|
\end{equation} |
262 |
|
Here $\mathbf{r}_{ij}$ is the vector starting at atom $i$ pointing |
263 |
|
towards $j$, and $\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i$ and $\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j$ |
264 |
< |
are the Euler angles of atom $i$ and $j$ |
265 |
< |
respectively. $\boldsymbol{\mu}_i$ is the dipole vector of atom |
266 |
< |
$i$ it takes its orientation from $\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i$. |
264 |
> |
are the Euler angles of atom $i$ and $j$ respectively. $|\mu_i|$ is |
265 |
> |
the magnitude of the dipole moment of atom $i$ and |
266 |
> |
$\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}_i$ is the standard unit orientation vector of |
267 |
> |
$\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i$. |
268 |
|
|
269 |
|
|
270 |
< |
\subsection{\label{sec:SSD}Water Model: SSD and Derivatives} |
270 |
> |
\subsection{\label{sec:SSD}The {\sc DUFF} Water Models: SSD/E and SSD/RF} |
271 |
|
|
272 |
< |
In the interest of computational efficiency, the native solvent used |
272 |
> |
In the interest of computational efficiency, the default solvent used |
273 |
|
in {\sc oopse} is the Soft Sticky Dipole (SSD) water model. SSD was |
274 |
|
developed by Ichiye \emph{et al.} as a modified form of the |
275 |
|
hard-sphere water model proposed by Bratko, Blum, and |
279 |
|
solvation shell. Thus, the interaction between two SSD water molecules |
280 |
|
\emph{i} and \emph{j} is given by the potential |
281 |
|
\begin{equation} |
282 |
< |
u_{ij} = u_{ij}^{LJ} (r_{ij})\ + u_{ij}^{dp} |
283 |
< |
(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)\ + |
284 |
< |
u_{ij}^{sp} |
285 |
< |
(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j), |
282 |
> |
V_{ij} = |
283 |
> |
V_{ij}^{LJ} (r_{ij})\ + V_{ij}^{dp} |
284 |
> |
(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)\ + |
285 |
> |
V_{ij}^{sp} |
286 |
> |
(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j), |
287 |
> |
\label{eq:ssdPot} |
288 |
|
\end{equation} |
289 |
|
where the $\mathbf{r}_{ij}$ is the position vector between molecules |
290 |
< |
\emph{i} and \emph{j} with magnitude equal to the distance $r_ij$, and |
290 |
> |
\emph{i} and \emph{j} with magnitude equal to the distance $r_{ij}$, and |
291 |
|
$\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i$ and $\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j$ represent the |
292 |
< |
orientations of the respective molecules. The Lennard-Jones, dipole, |
293 |
< |
and sticky parts of the potential are giving by the following |
294 |
< |
equations, |
292 |
> |
orientations of the respective molecules. The Lennard-Jones and dipole |
293 |
> |
parts of the potential are given by equations \ref{eq:lennardJonesPot} |
294 |
> |
and \ref{eq:dipolePot} respectively. The sticky part is described by |
295 |
> |
the following, |
296 |
|
\begin{equation} |
297 |
< |
u_{ij}^{LJ}(r_{ij}) = 4\epsilon \left[\left(\frac{\sigma}{r_{ij}}\right)^{12}-\left(\frac{\sigma}{r_{ij}}\right)^{6}\right], |
297 |
> |
u_{ij}^{sp}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)= |
298 |
> |
\frac{\nu_0}{2}[s(r_{ij})w(\mathbf{r}_{ij}, |
299 |
> |
\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j) + |
300 |
> |
s^\prime(r_{ij})w^\prime(\mathbf{r}_{ij}, |
301 |
> |
\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)]\ , |
302 |
> |
\label{eq:stickyPot} |
303 |
|
\end{equation} |
304 |
+ |
where $\nu_0$ is a strength parameter for the sticky potential, and |
305 |
+ |
$s$ and $s^\prime$ are cubic switching functions which turn off the |
306 |
+ |
sticky interaction beyond the first solvation shell. The $w$ function |
307 |
+ |
can be thought of as an attractive potential with tetrahedral |
308 |
+ |
geometry: |
309 |
|
\begin{equation} |
310 |
< |
u_{ij}^{dp} = \frac{\boldsymbol{\mu}_i\cdot\boldsymbol{\mu}_j}{r_{ij}^3}-\frac{3(\boldsymbol{\mu}_i\cdot\mathbf{r}_{ij})(\boldsymbol{\mu}_j\cdot\mathbf{r}_{ij})}{r_{ij}^5}\ , |
310 |
> |
w({\bf r}_{ij},{\bf \Omega}_i,{\bf \Omega}_j)= |
311 |
> |
\sin\theta_{ij}\sin2\theta_{ij}\cos2\phi_{ij}, |
312 |
> |
\label{eq:stickyW} |
313 |
|
\end{equation} |
314 |
+ |
while the $w^\prime$ function counters the normal aligned and |
315 |
+ |
anti-aligned structures favored by point dipoles: |
316 |
|
\begin{equation} |
317 |
< |
\begin{split} |
318 |
< |
u_{ij}^{sp} |
319 |
< |
(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j) |
299 |
< |
&= |
300 |
< |
\frac{\nu_0}{2}[s(r_{ij})w(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)\\ |
301 |
< |
& \quad \ + |
302 |
< |
s^\prime(r_{ij})w^\prime(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)]\ , |
303 |
< |
\end{split} |
317 |
> |
w^\prime({\bf r}_{ij},{\bf \Omega}_i,{\bf \Omega}_j)= |
318 |
> |
(\cos\theta_{ij}-0.6)^2(\cos\theta_{ij}+0.8)^2-w^0, |
319 |
> |
\label{eq:stickyWprime} |
320 |
|
\end{equation} |
321 |
< |
where $\boldsymbol{\mu}_i$ and $\boldsymbol{\mu}_j$ are the dipole |
322 |
< |
unit vectors of particles \emph{i} and \emph{j} with magnitude 2.35 D, |
323 |
< |
$\nu_0$ scales the strength of the overall sticky potential, $s$ and |
324 |
< |
$s^\prime$ are cubic switching functions. The $w$ and $w^\prime$ |
325 |
< |
functions take the following forms, |
326 |
< |
\begin{equation} |
327 |
< |
w(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j)=\sin\theta_{ij}\sin2\theta_{ij}\cos2\phi_{ij}, |
312 |
< |
\end{equation} |
313 |
< |
\begin{equation} |
314 |
< |
w^\prime(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i,\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j) = (\cos\theta_{ij}-0.6)^2(\cos\theta_{ij}+0.8)^2-w^0, |
315 |
< |
\end{equation} |
316 |
< |
where $w^0 = 0.07715$. The $w$ function is the tetrahedral attractive |
317 |
< |
term that promotes hydrogen bonding orientations within the first |
318 |
< |
solvation shell, and $w^\prime$ is a dipolar repulsion term that |
319 |
< |
repels unrealistic dipolar arrangements within the first solvation |
320 |
< |
shell. A more detailed description of the functional parts and |
321 |
< |
variables in this potential can be found in other |
322 |
< |
articles.\cite{liu96:new_model,chandra99:ssd_md} |
321 |
> |
It should be noted that $w$ is proportional to the sum of the $Y_3^2$ |
322 |
> |
and $Y_3^{-2}$ spherical harmonics (a linear combination which |
323 |
> |
enhances the tetrahedral geometry for hydrogen bonded structures), |
324 |
> |
while $w^\prime$ is a purely empirical function. A more detailed |
325 |
> |
description of the functional parts and variables in this potential |
326 |
> |
can be found in the original SSD |
327 |
> |
articles.\cite{Ichiye96,Ichiye96b,Ichiye99,Ichiye03} |
328 |
|
|
329 |
< |
Since SSD is a one-site point dipole model, the force calculations are |
330 |
< |
simplified significantly from a computational standpoint, in that the |
331 |
< |
number of long-range interactions is dramatically reduced. In the |
332 |
< |
original Monte Carlo simulations using this model, Ichiye \emph{et |
333 |
< |
al.} reported a calculation speed up of up to an order of magnitude |
334 |
< |
over other comparable models while maintaining the structural behavior |
335 |
< |
of water.\cite{liu96:new_model} In the original molecular dynamics studies of |
336 |
< |
SSD, it was shown that it actually improves upon the prediction of |
337 |
< |
water's dynamical properties over TIP3P and SPC/E.\cite{chandra99:ssd_md} |
329 |
> |
Since SSD is a single-point {\it dipolar} model, the force |
330 |
> |
calculations are simplified significantly relative to the standard |
331 |
> |
{\it charged} multi-point models. In the original Monte Carlo |
332 |
> |
simulations using this model, Ichiye {\it et al.} reported that using |
333 |
> |
SSD decreased computer time by a factor of 6-7 compared to other |
334 |
> |
models.\cite{Ichiye96} What is most impressive is that this savings |
335 |
> |
did not come at the expense of accurate depiction of the liquid state |
336 |
> |
properties. Indeed, SSD maintains reasonable agreement with the Soper |
337 |
> |
data for the structural features of liquid |
338 |
> |
water.\cite{Soper86,Ichiye96} Additionally, the dynamical properties |
339 |
> |
exhibited by SSD agree with experiment better than those of more |
340 |
> |
computationally expensive models (like TIP3P and |
341 |
> |
SPC/E).\cite{Ichiye99} The combination of speed and accurate depiction |
342 |
> |
of solvent properties makes SSD a very attractive model for the |
343 |
> |
simulation of large scale biochemical simulations. |
344 |
|
|
345 |
|
Recent constant pressure simulations revealed issues in the original |
346 |
|
SSD model that led to lower than expected densities at all target |
347 |
< |
pressures.\cite{Ichiye03,Gezelter04} Reparameterizations of the |
348 |
< |
original SSD have resulted in improved density behavior, as well as |
349 |
< |
alterations in the water structure and transport behavior. {\sc oopse} is |
350 |
< |
easily modified to impliment these new potential parameter sets for |
351 |
< |
the derivative water models: SSD1, SSD/E, and SSD/RF. All of the |
352 |
< |
variable parameters are listed in the accompanying BASS file, and |
353 |
< |
these parameters simply need to be changed to the updated values. |
347 |
> |
pressures.\cite{Ichiye03,Gezelter04} The default model in {\sc oopse} |
348 |
> |
is SSD/E, a density corrected derivative of SSD that exhibits improved |
349 |
> |
liquid structure and transport behavior. If the use of a reaction |
350 |
> |
field long-range interaction correction is desired, it is recommended |
351 |
> |
that the parameters be modified to those of the SSD/RF model. Solvent |
352 |
> |
parameters can be easily modified in an accompanying {\sc BASS} file |
353 |
> |
as illustrated in the scheme below. A table of the parameter values |
354 |
> |
and the drawbacks and benefits of the different density corrected SSD |
355 |
> |
models can be found in reference \ref{Gezelter04}. |
356 |
|
|
357 |
+ |
!!!Place a {\sc BASS} scheme showing SSD parameters around here!!! |
358 |
|
|
359 |
< |
\subsection{\label{sec:eam}Embedded Atom Model} |
359 |
> |
\subsection{\label{sec:eam}Embedded Atom Method} |
360 |
|
|
361 |
< |
Several molecular dynamics codes\cite{dynamo86} exist which have the |
361 |
> |
Several other molecular dynamics packages\cite{dynamo86} exist which have the |
362 |
|
capacity to simulate metallic systems, including some that have |
363 |
|
parallel computational abilities\cite{plimpton93}. Potentials that |
364 |
|
describe bonding transition metal |
365 |
|
systems\cite{Finnis84,Ercolessi88,Chen90,Qi99,Ercolessi02} have a |
366 |
< |
attractive interaction which models the stabilization of ``Embedding'' |
367 |
< |
a positively charged metal ion in an electron density created by the |
366 |
> |
attractive interaction which models ``Embedding'' |
367 |
> |
a positively charged metal ion in the electron density due to the |
368 |
|
free valance ``sea'' of electrons created by the surrounding atoms in |
369 |
|
the system. A mostly repulsive pairwise part of the potential |
370 |
|
describes the interaction of the positively charged metal core ions |
371 |
|
with one another. A particular potential description called the |
372 |
< |
Embedded Atom Method\cite{Daw84,FBD86,johnson89,Lu97}(EAM) that has |
372 |
> |
Embedded Atom Method\cite{Daw84,FBD86,johnson89,Lu97}({\sc eam}) that has |
373 |
|
particularly wide adoption has been selected for inclusion in OOPSE. A |
374 |
< |
good review of EAM and other metallic potential formulations was done |
374 |
> |
good review of {\sc eam} and other metallic potential formulations was done |
375 |
|
by Voter.\cite{voter} |
376 |
|
|
377 |
|
The {\sc eam} potential has the form: |
379 |
|
V & = & \sum_{i} F_{i}\left[\rho_{i}\right] + \sum_{i} \sum_{j \neq i} |
380 |
|
\phi_{ij}({\bf r}_{ij}) \\ |
381 |
|
\rho_{i} & = & \sum_{j \neq i} f_{j}({\bf r}_{ij}) |
382 |
< |
\end{eqnarray} |
382 |
> |
\end{eqnarray}S |
383 |
|
|
384 |
< |
where $\phi_{ij}$ is a primarily repulsive pairwise interaction |
385 |
< |
between atoms $i$ and $j$.In the origional formulation of |
372 |
< |
EAM\cite{Daw84}, $\phi_{ij}$ was an entirely repulsive term, however |
373 |
< |
in later refinements to EAM have shown that nonuniqueness between $F$ |
374 |
< |
and $\phi$ allow for more general forms for $\phi$.\cite{Daw89} The |
375 |
< |
embedding function $F_{i}$ is the energy required to embedded an |
376 |
< |
positively-charged core ion $i$ into a linear supeposition of |
384 |
> |
where $F_{i} $ is the embedding function that equates the energy required to embed a |
385 |
> |
positively-charged core ion $i$ into a linear superposition of |
386 |
|
sperically averaged atomic electron densities given by |
387 |
< |
$\rho_{i}$. There is a cutoff distance, $r_{cut}$, which limits the |
387 |
> |
$\rho_{i}$. $\phi_{ij}$ is a primarily repulsive pairwise interaction |
388 |
> |
between atoms $i$ and $j$. In the original formulation of |
389 |
> |
{\sc eam} cite{Daw84}, $\phi_{ij}$ was an entirely repulsive term, however |
390 |
> |
in later refinements to EAM have shown that nonuniqueness between $F$ |
391 |
> |
and $\phi$ allow for more general forms for $\phi$.\cite{Daw89} |
392 |
> |
There is a cutoff distance, $r_{cut}$, which limits the |
393 |
|
summations in the {\sc eam} equation to the few dozen atoms |
394 |
|
surrounding atom $i$ for both the density $\rho$ and pairwise $\phi$ |
395 |
< |
interactions. |
395 |
> |
interactions. Foiles et al. fit EAM potentials for fcc metals Cu, Ag, Au, Ni, Pd, Pt and alloys of these metals\cite{FDB86}. These potential fits are in the DYNAMO 86 format and are included with {\sc oopse}. |
396 |
|
|
397 |
+ |
|
398 |
|
\subsection{\label{Sec:pbc}Periodic Boundary Conditions} |
399 |
|
|
400 |
< |
\textit{Periodic boundary conditions} are widely used to simulate truly |
401 |
< |
macroscopic systems with a relatively small number of particles. Simulation |
402 |
< |
box is replicated throughout space to form an infinite lattice. During the |
403 |
< |
simulation, when a particle moves in the primary cell, its periodic image |
404 |
< |
particles in other boxes move in exactly the same direction with exactly the |
405 |
< |
same orientation.Thus, as a particle leaves the primary cell, one of its |
406 |
< |
images will enter through the opposite face.If the simulation box is large |
407 |
< |
enough to avoid "feeling" the symmetric of the periodic lattice,the surface |
408 |
< |
effect could be ignored. Cubic and parallelepiped are the available periodic |
409 |
< |
cells. \bigskip In OOPSE, we use the matrix instead of the vector to describe |
410 |
< |
the property of the simulation box. Therefore, not only the size of the |
411 |
< |
simulation box could be changed during the simulation, but also the shape of |
412 |
< |
it. The transformation from box space vector $\overrightarrow{s}$ to its |
413 |
< |
corresponding real space vector $\overrightarrow{r}$ is defined by |
414 |
< |
\begin{equation} |
415 |
< |
\overrightarrow{r}=H\overrightarrow{s}% |
416 |
< |
\end{equation} |
417 |
< |
|
418 |
< |
|
419 |
< |
where $H=(h_{x},h_{y},h_{z})$ is a transformation matrix made up of the three |
420 |
< |
box axis vectors. $h_{x},h_{y}$ and $h_{z}$ represent the sides of the |
421 |
< |
simulation box respectively. |
422 |
< |
|
423 |
< |
To find the minimum image, we need to convert the real vector to its |
424 |
< |
corresponding vector in box space first, \bigskip% |
425 |
< |
\begin{equation} |
426 |
< |
\overrightarrow{s}=H^{-1}\overrightarrow{r}% |
427 |
< |
\end{equation} |
428 |
< |
And then, each element of $\overrightarrow{s}$ is casted to lie between -0.5 |
429 |
< |
to 0.5, |
430 |
< |
\begin{equation} |
431 |
< |
s_{i}^{\prime}=s_{i}-round(s_{i}) |
432 |
< |
\end{equation} |
433 |
< |
where% |
434 |
< |
|
435 |
< |
\begin{equation} |
436 |
< |
round(x)=\lfloor{x+0.5}\rfloor\text{ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ }if\text{ |
437 |
< |
}x\geqslant0 |
438 |
< |
\end{equation} |
439 |
< |
% |
440 |
< |
|
441 |
< |
\begin{equation} |
442 |
< |
round(x)=\lceil{x-0.5}\rceil\text{ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ }if\text{ }x<0 |
443 |
< |
\end{equation} |
444 |
< |
|
445 |
< |
|
446 |
< |
For example, $round(3.6)=4$,$round(3.1)=3$, $round(-3.6)=-4$, $round(-3.1)=-3$. |
447 |
< |
|
448 |
< |
Finally, we could get the minimum image by transforming back to real space,% |
449 |
< |
|
450 |
< |
\begin{equation} |
451 |
< |
\overrightarrow{r^{\prime}}=H^{-1}\overrightarrow{s^{\prime}}% |
452 |
< |
\end{equation} |
400 |
> |
\textit{Periodic boundary conditions} are widely used to simulate truly |
401 |
> |
macroscopic systems with a relatively small number of particles. The |
402 |
> |
simulation box is replicated throughout space to form an infinite |
403 |
> |
lattice. During the simulation, when a particle moves in the primary |
404 |
> |
cell, its image in other boxes move in exactly the same direction with |
405 |
> |
exactly the same orientation.Thus, as a particle leaves the primary |
406 |
> |
cell, one of its images will enter through the opposite face.If the |
407 |
> |
simulation box is large enough to avoid "feeling" the symmetries of |
408 |
> |
the periodic lattice, surface effects can be ignored. Cubic, |
409 |
> |
orthorhombic and parallelepiped are the available periodic cells In |
410 |
> |
OOPSE. We use a matrix to describe the property of the simulation |
411 |
> |
box. Therefore, both the size and shape of the simulation box can be |
412 |
> |
changed during the simulation. The transformation from box space |
413 |
> |
vector $\mathbf{s}$ to its corresponding real space vector |
414 |
> |
$\mathbf{r}$ is defined by |
415 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
416 |
> |
\mathbf{r}=\underline{\underline{H}}\cdot\mathbf{s}% |
417 |
> |
\end{equation} |
418 |
> |
|
419 |
> |
|
420 |
> |
where $H=(h_{x},h_{y},h_{z})$ is a transformation matrix made up of |
421 |
> |
the three box axis vectors. $h_{x},h_{y}$ and $h_{z}$ represent the |
422 |
> |
three sides of the simulation box respectively. |
423 |
> |
|
424 |
> |
To find the minimum image, we convert the real vector to its |
425 |
> |
corresponding vector in box space first, \bigskip% |
426 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
427 |
> |
\mathbf{s}=\underline{\underline{H}}^{-1}\cdot\mathbf{r}% |
428 |
> |
\end{equation} |
429 |
> |
And then, each element of $\mathbf{s}$ is wrapped to lie between -0.5 to 0.5, |
430 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
431 |
> |
s_{i}^{\prime}=s_{i}-round(s_{i}) |
432 |
> |
\end{equation} |
433 |
> |
where |
434 |
> |
|
435 |
> |
% |
436 |
> |
|
437 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
438 |
> |
round(x)=\left\{ |
439 |
> |
\begin{array}[c]{c}% |
440 |
> |
\lfloor{x+0.5}\rfloor & \text{if \ }x\geqslant0\\ |
441 |
> |
\lceil{x-0.5}\rceil & \text{otherwise}% |
442 |
> |
\end{array} |
443 |
> |
\right. |
444 |
> |
\end{equation} |
445 |
> |
|
446 |
> |
|
447 |
> |
For example, $round(3.6)=4$,$round(3.1)=3$, $round(-3.6)=-4$, |
448 |
> |
$round(-3.1)=-3$. |
449 |
> |
|
450 |
> |
Finally, we obtain the minimum image coordinates by transforming back |
451 |
> |
to real space,% |
452 |
> |
|
453 |
> |
\begin{equation} |
454 |
> |
\mathbf{r}^{\prime}=\underline{\underline{H}}^{-1}\cdot\mathbf{s}^{\prime}% |
455 |
> |
\end{equation} |
456 |
> |
|