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

Comparing trunk/tengDissertation/Introduction.tex (file contents):
Revision 2695 by tim, Thu Apr 6 04:07:57 2006 UTC vs.
Revision 2904 by tim, Wed Jun 28 17:36:32 2006 UTC

# Line 6 | Line 6 | for a given system of particles. There are three funda
6   Closely related to Classical Mechanics, Molecular Dynamics
7   simulations are carried out by integrating the equations of motion
8   for a given system of particles. There are three fundamental ideas
9 < behind classical mechanics. Firstly, One can determine the state of
9 > behind classical mechanics. Firstly, one can determine the state of
10   a mechanical system at any time of interest; Secondly, all the
11   mechanical properties of the system at that time can be determined
12   by combining the knowledge of the properties of the system with the
# Line 17 | Line 17 | motion of particles is the foundation of the classical
17   \subsection{\label{introSection:newtonian}Newtonian Mechanics}
18   The discovery of Newton's three laws of mechanics which govern the
19   motion of particles is the foundation of the classical mechanics.
20 < Newton¡¯s first law defines a class of inertial frames. Inertial
20 > Newton's first law defines a class of inertial frames. Inertial
21   frames are reference frames where a particle not interacting with
22   other bodies will move with constant speed in the same direction.
23 < With respect to inertial frames Newton¡¯s second law has the form
23 > With respect to inertial frames, Newton's second law has the form
24   \begin{equation}
25 < F = \frac {dp}{dt} = \frac {mv}{dt}
25 > F = \frac {dp}{dt} = \frac {mdv}{dt}
26   \label{introEquation:newtonSecondLaw}
27   \end{equation}
28   A point mass interacting with other bodies moves with the
29   acceleration along the direction of the force acting on it. Let
30 < $F_ij$ be the force that particle $i$ exerts on particle $j$, and
31 < $F_ji$ be the force that particle $j$ exerts on particle $i$.
32 < Newton¡¯s third law states that
30 > $F_{ij}$ be the force that particle $i$ exerts on particle $j$, and
31 > $F_{ji}$ be the force that particle $j$ exerts on particle $i$.
32 > Newton's third law states that
33   \begin{equation}
34 < F_ij = -F_ji
34 > F_{ij} = -F_{ji}.
35   \label{introEquation:newtonThirdLaw}
36   \end{equation}
37
37   Conservation laws of Newtonian Mechanics play very important roles
38   in solving mechanics problems. The linear momentum of a particle is
39   conserved if it is free or it experiences no force. The second
# Line 46 | Line 45 | The torque $\tau$ with respect to the same origin is d
45   \end{equation}
46   The torque $\tau$ with respect to the same origin is defined to be
47   \begin{equation}
48 < N \equiv r \times F \label{introEquation:torqueDefinition}
48 > \tau \equiv r \times F \label{introEquation:torqueDefinition}
49   \end{equation}
50   Differentiating Eq.~\ref{introEquation:angularMomentumDefinition},
51   \[
# Line 59 | Line 58 | thus,
58   \]
59   thus,
60   \begin{equation}
61 < \dot L = r \times \dot p = N
61 > \dot L = r \times \dot p = \tau
62   \end{equation}
63   If there are no external torques acting on a body, the angular
64   momentum of it is conserved. The last conservation theorem state
65 < that if all forces are conservative, Energy $E = T + V$ is
66 < conserved. All of these conserved quantities are important factors
67 < to determine the quality of numerical integration scheme for rigid
68 < body \cite{Dullweber1997}.
65 > that if all forces are conservative, energy is conserved,
66 > \begin{equation}E = T + V. \label{introEquation:energyConservation}
67 > \end{equation}
68 > All of these conserved quantities are important factors to determine
69 > the quality of numerical integration schemes for rigid bodies
70 > \cite{Dullweber1997}.
71  
72   \subsection{\label{introSection:lagrangian}Lagrangian Mechanics}
73  
74 < Newtonian Mechanics suffers from two important limitations: it
75 < describes their motion in special cartesian coordinate systems.
76 < Another limitation of Newtonian mechanics becomes obvious when we
77 < try to describe systems with large numbers of particles. It becomes
78 < very difficult to predict the properties of the system by carrying
79 < out calculations involving the each individual interaction between
80 < all the particles, even if we know all of the details of the
80 < interaction. In order to overcome some of the practical difficulties
81 < which arise in attempts to apply Newton's equation to complex
82 < system, alternative procedures may be developed.
74 > Newtonian Mechanics suffers from a important limitation: motions can
75 > only be described in cartesian coordinate systems which make it
76 > impossible to predict analytically the properties of the system even
77 > if we know all of the details of the interaction. In order to
78 > overcome some of the practical difficulties which arise in attempts
79 > to apply Newton's equation to complex system, approximate numerical
80 > procedures may be developed.
81  
82 < \subsubsection{\label{introSection:halmiltonPrinciple}Hamilton's
83 < Principle}
82 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:halmiltonPrinciple}\textbf{Hamilton's
83 > Principle}}
84  
85   Hamilton introduced the dynamical principle upon which it is
86 < possible to base all of mechanics and, indeed, most of classical
87 < physics. Hamilton's Principle may be stated as follow,
88 <
89 < The actual trajectory, along which a dynamical system may move from
90 < one point to another within a specified time, is derived by finding
91 < the path which minimizes the time integral of the difference between
94 < the kinetic, $K$, and potential energies, $U$ \cite{tolman79}.
86 > possible to base all of mechanics and most of classical physics.
87 > Hamilton's Principle may be stated as follows: the actual
88 > trajectory, along which a dynamical system may move from one point
89 > to another within a specified time, is derived by finding the path
90 > which minimizes the time integral of the difference between the
91 > kinetic, $K$, and potential energies, $U$,
92   \begin{equation}
93 < \delta \int_{t_1 }^{t_2 } {(K - U)dt = 0} ,
93 > \delta \int_{t_1 }^{t_2 } {(K - U)dt = 0}.
94   \label{introEquation:halmitonianPrinciple1}
95   \end{equation}
99
96   For simple mechanical systems, where the forces acting on the
97 < different part are derivable from a potential and the velocities are
98 < small compared with that of light, the Lagrangian function $L$ can
99 < be define as the difference between the kinetic energy of the system
104 < and its potential energy,
97 > different parts are derivable from a potential, the Lagrangian
98 > function $L$ can be defined as the difference between the kinetic
99 > energy of the system and its potential energy,
100   \begin{equation}
101 < L \equiv K - U = L(q_i ,\dot q_i ) ,
101 > L \equiv K - U = L(q_i ,\dot q_i ).
102   \label{introEquation:lagrangianDef}
103   \end{equation}
104 < then Eq.~\ref{introEquation:halmitonianPrinciple1} becomes
104 > Thus, Eq.~\ref{introEquation:halmitonianPrinciple1} becomes
105   \begin{equation}
106 < \delta \int_{t_1 }^{t_2 } {L dt = 0} ,
106 > \delta \int_{t_1 }^{t_2 } {L dt = 0} .
107   \label{introEquation:halmitonianPrinciple2}
108   \end{equation}
109  
110 < \subsubsection{\label{introSection:equationOfMotionLagrangian}The
111 < Equations of Motion in Lagrangian Mechanics}
110 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:equationOfMotionLagrangian}\textbf{The
111 > Equations of Motion in Lagrangian Mechanics}}
112  
113 < for a holonomic system of $f$ degrees of freedom, the equations of
114 < motion in the Lagrangian form is
113 > For a system of $f$ degrees of freedom, the equations of motion in
114 > the Lagrangian form is
115   \begin{equation}
116   \frac{d}{{dt}}\frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial \dot q_i }} -
117   \frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial q_i }} = 0,{\rm{ }}i = 1, \ldots,f
# Line 130 | Line 125 | classical mechanics. If the potential energy of a syst
125   Arising from Lagrangian Mechanics, Hamiltonian Mechanics was
126   introduced by William Rowan Hamilton in 1833 as a re-formulation of
127   classical mechanics. If the potential energy of a system is
128 < independent of generalized velocities, the generalized momenta can
134 < be defined as
128 > independent of velocities, the momenta can be defined as
129   \begin{equation}
130   p_i = \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot q_i}
131   \label{introEquation:generalizedMomenta}
# Line 141 | Line 135 | p_i  = \frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial q_i }}
135   p_i  = \frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial q_i }}
136   \label{introEquation:generalizedMomentaDot}
137   \end{equation}
144
138   With the help of the generalized momenta, we may now define a new
139   quantity $H$ by the equation
140   \begin{equation}
# Line 149 | Line 142 | where $ \dot q_1  \ldots \dot q_f $ are generalized ve
142   \label{introEquation:hamiltonianDefByLagrangian}
143   \end{equation}
144   where $ \dot q_1  \ldots \dot q_f $ are generalized velocities and
145 < $L$ is the Lagrangian function for the system.
146 <
154 < Differentiating Eq.~\ref{introEquation:hamiltonianDefByLagrangian},
155 < one can obtain
145 > $L$ is the Lagrangian function for the system. Differentiating
146 > Eq.~\ref{introEquation:hamiltonianDefByLagrangian}, one can obtain
147   \begin{equation}
148   dH = \sum\limits_k {\left( {p_k d\dot q_k  + \dot q_k dp_k  -
149   \frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial q_k }}dq_k  - \frac{{\partial
150   L}}{{\partial \dot q_k }}d\dot q_k } \right)}  - \frac{{\partial
151 < L}}{{\partial t}}dt \label{introEquation:diffHamiltonian1}
151 > L}}{{\partial t}}dt . \label{introEquation:diffHamiltonian1}
152   \end{equation}
153 < Making use of  Eq.~\ref{introEquation:generalizedMomenta}, the
154 < second and fourth terms in the parentheses cancel. Therefore,
153 > Making use of Eq.~\ref{introEquation:generalizedMomenta}, the second
154 > and fourth terms in the parentheses cancel. Therefore,
155   Eq.~\ref{introEquation:diffHamiltonian1} can be rewritten as
156   \begin{equation}
157   dH = \sum\limits_k {\left( {\dot q_k dp_k  - \dot p_k dq_k }
158 < \right)}  - \frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial t}}dt
158 > \right)}  - \frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial t}}dt .
159   \label{introEquation:diffHamiltonian2}
160   \end{equation}
161   By identifying the coefficients of $dq_k$, $dp_k$ and dt, we can
162   find
163   \begin{equation}
164 < \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial p_k }} = q_k
164 > \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial p_k }} = \dot {q_k}
165   \label{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate}
166   \end{equation}
167   \begin{equation}
168 < \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial q_k }} =  - p_k
168 > \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial q_k }} =  - \dot {p_k}
169   \label{introEquation:motionHamiltonianMomentum}
170   \end{equation}
171   and
# Line 183 | Line 174 | t}}
174   t}}
175   \label{introEquation:motionHamiltonianTime}
176   \end{equation}
177 <
187 < Eq.~\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate} and
177 > where Eq.~\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate} and
178   Eq.~\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianMomentum} are Hamilton's
179   equation of motion. Due to their symmetrical formula, they are also
180 < known as the canonical equations of motions \cite{Goldstein01}.
180 > known as the canonical equations of motions \cite{Goldstein2001}.
181  
182   An important difference between Lagrangian approach and the
183   Hamiltonian approach is that the Lagrangian is considered to be a
184 < function of the generalized velocities $\dot q_i$ and the
185 < generalized coordinates $q_i$, while the Hamiltonian is considered
186 < to be a function of the generalized momenta $p_i$ and the conjugate
187 < generalized coordinate $q_i$. Hamiltonian Mechanics is more
188 < appropriate for application to statistical mechanics and quantum
189 < mechanics, since it treats the coordinate and its time derivative as
190 < independent variables and it only works with 1st-order differential
191 < equations\cite{Marion90}.
192 <
193 < When studying Hamiltonian system, it is more convenient to use
194 < notation
184 > function of the generalized velocities $\dot q_i$ and coordinates
185 > $q_i$, while the Hamiltonian is considered to be a function of the
186 > generalized momenta $p_i$ and the conjugate coordinates $q_i$.
187 > Hamiltonian Mechanics is more appropriate for application to
188 > statistical mechanics and quantum mechanics, since it treats the
189 > coordinate and its time derivative as independent variables and it
190 > only works with 1st-order differential equations\cite{Marion1990}.
191 > In Newtonian Mechanics, a system described by conservative forces
192 > conserves the total energy
193 > (Eq.~\ref{introEquation:energyConservation}). It follows that
194 > Hamilton's equations of motion conserve the total Hamiltonian
195   \begin{equation}
196 < r = r(q,p)^T
196 > \frac{{dH}}{{dt}} = \sum\limits_i {\left( {\frac{{\partial
197 > H}}{{\partial q_i }}\dot q_i  + \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial p_i
198 > }}\dot p_i } \right)}  = \sum\limits_i {\left( {\frac{{\partial
199 > H}}{{\partial q_i }}\frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial p_i }} -
200 > \frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial p_i }}\frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial
201 > q_i }}} \right) = 0}. \label{introEquation:conserveHalmitonian}
202   \end{equation}
208 and to introduce a $2n \times 2n$ canonical structure matrix $J$,
209 \begin{equation}
210 J = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
211   0 & I  \\
212   { - I} & 0  \\
213 \end{array}} \right)
214 \label{introEquation:canonicalMatrix}
215 \end{equation}
216 where $I$ is a $n \times n$ identity matrix and $J$ is a
217 skew-symmetric matrix ($ J^T  =  - J $). Thus, Hamiltonian system
218 can be rewritten as,
219 \begin{equation}
220 \frac{d}{{dt}}r = J\nabla _r H(r)
221 \label{introEquation:compactHamiltonian}
222 \end{equation}
203  
224 %\subsection{\label{introSection:canonicalTransformation}Canonical
225 %Transformation}
226
227 \section{\label{introSection:geometricIntegratos}Geometric Integrators}
228
229 \subsection{\label{introSection:symplecticMaps}Symplectic Maps and Methods}
230
231 \subsection{\label{Construction of Symplectic Methods}}
232
204   \section{\label{introSection:statisticalMechanics}Statistical
205   Mechanics}
206  
207   The thermodynamic behaviors and properties of Molecular Dynamics
208   simulation are governed by the principle of Statistical Mechanics.
209   The following section will give a brief introduction to some of the
210 < Statistical Mechanics concepts presented in this dissertation.
210 > Statistical Mechanics concepts and theorem presented in this
211 > dissertation.
212  
213 < \subsection{\label{introSection::ensemble}Ensemble and Phase Space}
213 > \subsection{\label{introSection:ensemble}Phase Space and Ensemble}
214  
215 + Mathematically, phase space is the space which represents all
216 + possible states. Each possible state of the system corresponds to
217 + one unique point in the phase space. For mechanical systems, the
218 + phase space usually consists of all possible values of position and
219 + momentum variables. Consider a dynamic system of $f$ particles in a
220 + cartesian space, where each of the $6f$ coordinates and momenta is
221 + assigned to one of $6f$ mutually orthogonal axes, the phase space of
222 + this system is a $6f$ dimensional space. A point, $x =
223 + (\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
224 + \over q} _1 , \ldots
225 + ,\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
226 + \over q} _f
227 + ,\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
228 + \over p} _1  \ldots
229 + ,\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
230 + \over p} _f )$ , with a unique set of values of $6f$ coordinates and
231 + momenta is a phase space vector.
232 + %%%fix me
233 +
234 + In statistical mechanics, the condition of an ensemble at any time
235 + can be regarded as appropriately specified by the density $\rho$
236 + with which representative points are distributed over the phase
237 + space. The density distribution for an ensemble with $f$ degrees of
238 + freedom is defined as,
239 + \begin{equation}
240 + \rho  = \rho (q_1 , \ldots ,q_f ,p_1 , \ldots ,p_f ,t).
241 + \label{introEquation:densityDistribution}
242 + \end{equation}
243 + Governed by the principles of mechanics, the phase points change
244 + their locations which would change the density at any time at phase
245 + space. Hence, the density distribution is also to be taken as a
246 + function of the time.
247 +
248 + The number of systems $\delta N$ at time $t$ can be determined by,
249 + \begin{equation}
250 + \delta N = \rho (q,p,t)dq_1  \ldots dq_f dp_1  \ldots dp_f.
251 + \label{introEquation:deltaN}
252 + \end{equation}
253 + Assuming a large enough population of systems, we can sufficiently
254 + approximate $\delta N$ without introducing discontinuity when we go
255 + from one region in the phase space to another. By integrating over
256 + the whole phase space,
257 + \begin{equation}
258 + N = \int { \ldots \int {\rho (q,p,t)dq_1 } ...dq_f dp_1 } ...dp_f
259 + \label{introEquation:totalNumberSystem}
260 + \end{equation}
261 + gives us an expression for the total number of the systems. Hence,
262 + the probability per unit in the phase space can be obtained by,
263 + \begin{equation}
264 + \frac{{\rho (q,p,t)}}{N} = \frac{{\rho (q,p,t)}}{{\int { \ldots \int
265 + {\rho (q,p,t)dq_1 } ...dq_f dp_1 } ...dp_f }}.
266 + \label{introEquation:unitProbability}
267 + \end{equation}
268 + With the help of Eq.~\ref{introEquation:unitProbability} and the
269 + knowledge of the system, it is possible to calculate the average
270 + value of any desired quantity which depends on the coordinates and
271 + momenta of the system. Even when the dynamics of the real system is
272 + complex, or stochastic, or even discontinuous, the average
273 + properties of the ensemble of possibilities as a whole remaining
274 + well defined. For a classical system in thermal equilibrium with its
275 + environment, the ensemble average of a mechanical quantity, $\langle
276 + A(q , p) \rangle_t$, takes the form of an integral over the phase
277 + space of the system,
278 + \begin{equation}
279 + \langle  A(q , p) \rangle_t = \frac{{\int { \ldots \int {A(q,p)\rho
280 + (q,p,t)dq_1 } ...dq_f dp_1 } ...dp_f }}{{\int { \ldots \int {\rho
281 + (q,p,t)dq_1 } ...dq_f dp_1 } ...dp_f }}
282 + \label{introEquation:ensembelAverage}
283 + \end{equation}
284 +
285 + There are several different types of ensembles with different
286 + statistical characteristics. As a function of macroscopic
287 + parameters, such as temperature \textit{etc}, the partition function
288 + can be used to describe the statistical properties of a system in
289 + thermodynamic equilibrium. As an ensemble of systems, each of which
290 + is known to be thermally isolated and conserve energy, the
291 + Microcanonical ensemble (NVE) has a partition function like,
292 + \begin{equation}
293 + \Omega (N,V,E) = e^{\beta TS}. \label{introEquation:NVEPartition}
294 + \end{equation}
295 + A canonical ensemble (NVT)is an ensemble of systems, each of which
296 + can share its energy with a large heat reservoir. The distribution
297 + of the total energy amongst the possible dynamical states is given
298 + by the partition function,
299 + \begin{equation}
300 + \Omega (N,V,T) = e^{ - \beta A}.
301 + \label{introEquation:NVTPartition}
302 + \end{equation}
303 + Here, $A$ is the Helmholtz free energy which is defined as $ A = U -
304 + TS$. Since most experiments are carried out under constant pressure
305 + condition, the isothermal-isobaric ensemble (NPT) plays a very
306 + important role in molecular simulations. The isothermal-isobaric
307 + ensemble allow the system to exchange energy with a heat bath of
308 + temperature $T$ and to change the volume as well. Its partition
309 + function is given as
310 + \begin{equation}
311 + \Delta (N,P,T) =  - e^{\beta G}.
312 + \label{introEquation:NPTPartition}
313 + \end{equation}
314 + Here, $G = U - TS + PV$, and $G$ is called Gibbs free energy.
315 +
316 + \subsection{\label{introSection:liouville}Liouville's theorem}
317 +
318 + Liouville's theorem is the foundation on which statistical mechanics
319 + rests. It describes the time evolution of the phase space
320 + distribution function. In order to calculate the rate of change of
321 + $\rho$, we begin from Eq.~\ref{introEquation:deltaN}. If we consider
322 + the two faces perpendicular to the $q_1$ axis, which are located at
323 + $q_1$ and $q_1 + \delta q_1$, the number of phase points leaving the
324 + opposite face is given by the expression,
325 + \begin{equation}
326 + \left( {\rho  + \frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial q_1 }}\delta q_1 }
327 + \right)\left( {\dot q_1  + \frac{{\partial \dot q_1 }}{{\partial q_1
328 + }}\delta q_1 } \right)\delta q_2  \ldots \delta q_f \delta p_1
329 + \ldots \delta p_f .
330 + \end{equation}
331 + Summing all over the phase space, we obtain
332 + \begin{equation}
333 + \frac{{d(\delta N)}}{{dt}} =  - \sum\limits_{i = 1}^f {\left[ {\rho
334 + \left( {\frac{{\partial \dot q_i }}{{\partial q_i }} +
335 + \frac{{\partial \dot p_i }}{{\partial p_i }}} \right) + \left(
336 + {\frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial q_i }}\dot q_i  + \frac{{\partial
337 + \rho }}{{\partial p_i }}\dot p_i } \right)} \right]} \delta q_1
338 + \ldots \delta q_f \delta p_1  \ldots \delta p_f .
339 + \end{equation}
340 + Differentiating the equations of motion in Hamiltonian formalism
341 + (\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate},
342 + \ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianMomentum}), we can show,
343 + \begin{equation}
344 + \sum\limits_i {\left( {\frac{{\partial \dot q_i }}{{\partial q_i }}
345 + + \frac{{\partial \dot p_i }}{{\partial p_i }}} \right)}  = 0 ,
346 + \end{equation}
347 + which cancels the first terms of the right hand side. Furthermore,
348 + dividing $ \delta q_1  \ldots \delta q_f \delta p_1  \ldots \delta
349 + p_f $ in both sides, we can write out Liouville's theorem in a
350 + simple form,
351 + \begin{equation}
352 + \frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial t}} + \sum\limits_{i = 1}^f
353 + {\left( {\frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial q_i }}\dot q_i  +
354 + \frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial p_i }}\dot p_i } \right)}  = 0 .
355 + \label{introEquation:liouvilleTheorem}
356 + \end{equation}
357 + Liouville's theorem states that the distribution function is
358 + constant along any trajectory in phase space. In classical
359 + statistical mechanics, since the number of members in an ensemble is
360 + huge and constant, we can assume the local density has no reason
361 + (other than classical mechanics) to change,
362 + \begin{equation}
363 + \frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial t}} = 0.
364 + \label{introEquation:stationary}
365 + \end{equation}
366 + In such stationary system, the density of distribution $\rho$ can be
367 + connected to the Hamiltonian $H$ through Maxwell-Boltzmann
368 + distribution,
369 + \begin{equation}
370 + \rho  \propto e^{ - \beta H}
371 + \label{introEquation:densityAndHamiltonian}
372 + \end{equation}
373 +
374 + \subsubsection{\label{introSection:phaseSpaceConservation}\textbf{Conservation of Phase Space}}
375 + Lets consider a region in the phase space,
376 + \begin{equation}
377 + \delta v = \int { \ldots \int {dq_1 } ...dq_f dp_1 } ..dp_f .
378 + \end{equation}
379 + If this region is small enough, the density $\rho$ can be regarded
380 + as uniform over the whole integral. Thus, the number of phase points
381 + inside this region is given by,
382 + \begin{equation}
383 + \delta N = \rho \delta v = \rho \int { \ldots \int {dq_1 } ...dq_f
384 + dp_1 } ..dp_f.
385 + \end{equation}
386 +
387 + \begin{equation}
388 + \frac{{d(\delta N)}}{{dt}} = \frac{{d\rho }}{{dt}}\delta v + \rho
389 + \frac{d}{{dt}}(\delta v) = 0.
390 + \end{equation}
391 + With the help of stationary assumption
392 + (\ref{introEquation:stationary}), we obtain the principle of the
393 + \emph{conservation of volume in phase space},
394 + \begin{equation}
395 + \frac{d}{{dt}}(\delta v) = \frac{d}{{dt}}\int { \ldots \int {dq_1 }
396 + ...dq_f dp_1 } ..dp_f  = 0.
397 + \label{introEquation:volumePreserving}
398 + \end{equation}
399 +
400 + \subsubsection{\label{introSection:liouvilleInOtherForms}\textbf{Liouville's Theorem in Other Forms}}
401 +
402 + Liouville's theorem can be expresses in a variety of different forms
403 + which are convenient within different contexts. For any two function
404 + $F$ and $G$ of the coordinates and momenta of a system, the Poisson
405 + bracket ${F, G}$ is defined as
406 + \begin{equation}
407 + \left\{ {F,G} \right\} = \sum\limits_i {\left( {\frac{{\partial
408 + F}}{{\partial q_i }}\frac{{\partial G}}{{\partial p_i }} -
409 + \frac{{\partial F}}{{\partial p_i }}\frac{{\partial G}}{{\partial
410 + q_i }}} \right)}.
411 + \label{introEquation:poissonBracket}
412 + \end{equation}
413 + Substituting equations of motion in Hamiltonian formalism(
414 + Eq.~\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate} ,
415 + Eq.~\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianMomentum} ) into
416 + (Eq.~\ref{introEquation:liouvilleTheorem}), we can rewrite
417 + Liouville's theorem using Poisson bracket notion,
418 + \begin{equation}
419 + \left( {\frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial t}}} \right) =  - \left\{
420 + {\rho ,H} \right\}.
421 + \label{introEquation:liouvilleTheromInPoissin}
422 + \end{equation}
423 + Moreover, the Liouville operator is defined as
424 + \begin{equation}
425 + iL = \sum\limits_{i = 1}^f {\left( {\frac{{\partial H}}{{\partial
426 + p_i }}\frac{\partial }{{\partial q_i }} - \frac{{\partial
427 + H}}{{\partial q_i }}\frac{\partial }{{\partial p_i }}} \right)}
428 + \label{introEquation:liouvilleOperator}
429 + \end{equation}
430 + In terms of Liouville operator, Liouville's equation can also be
431 + expressed as
432 + \begin{equation}
433 + \left( {\frac{{\partial \rho }}{{\partial t}}} \right) =  - iL\rho
434 + \label{introEquation:liouvilleTheoremInOperator}
435 + \end{equation}
436 +
437   \subsection{\label{introSection:ergodic}The Ergodic Hypothesis}
438  
439   Various thermodynamic properties can be calculated from Molecular
440   Dynamics simulation. By comparing experimental values with the
441   calculated properties, one can determine the accuracy of the
442 < simulation and the quality of the underlying model. However, both of
443 < experiment and computer simulation are usually performed during a
442 > simulation and the quality of the underlying model. However, both
443 > experiments and computer simulations are usually performed during a
444   certain time interval and the measurements are averaged over a
445   period of them which is different from the average behavior of
446 < many-body system in Statistical Mechanics. Fortunately, Ergodic
447 < Hypothesis is proposed to make a connection between time average and
448 < ensemble average. It states that time average and average over the
449 < statistical ensemble are identical \cite{Frenkel1996, leach01:mm}.
446 > many-body system in Statistical Mechanics. Fortunately, the Ergodic
447 > Hypothesis makes a connection between time average and the ensemble
448 > average. It states that the time average and average over the
449 > statistical ensemble are identical \cite{Frenkel1996, Leach2001}.
450   \begin{equation}
451 < \langle A \rangle_t = \mathop {\lim }\limits_{t \to \infty }
452 < \frac{1}{t}\int\limits_0^t {A(p(t),q(t))dt = \int\limits_\Gamma
453 < {A(p(t),q(t))} } \rho (p(t), q(t)) dpdq
451 > \langle A(q , p) \rangle_t = \mathop {\lim }\limits_{t \to \infty }
452 > \frac{1}{t}\int\limits_0^t {A(q(t),p(t))dt = \int\limits_\Gamma
453 > {A(q(t),p(t))} } \rho (q(t), p(t)) dqdp
454   \end{equation}
455 < where $\langle A \rangle_t$ is an equilibrium value of a physical
456 < quantity and $\rho (p(t), q(t))$ is the equilibrium distribution
457 < function. If an observation is averaged over a sufficiently long
458 < time (longer than relaxation time), all accessible microstates in
459 < phase space are assumed to be equally probed, giving a properly
460 < weighted statistical average. This allows the researcher freedom of
461 < choice when deciding how best to measure a given observable. In case
462 < an ensemble averaged approach sounds most reasonable, the Monte
463 < Carlo techniques\cite{metropolis:1949} can be utilized. Or if the
464 < system lends itself to a time averaging approach, the Molecular
465 < Dynamics techniques in Sec.~\ref{introSection:molecularDynamics}
466 < will be the best choice.
455 > where $\langle  A(q , p) \rangle_t$ is an equilibrium value of a
456 > physical quantity and $\rho (p(t), q(t))$ is the equilibrium
457 > distribution function. If an observation is averaged over a
458 > sufficiently long time (longer than relaxation time), all accessible
459 > microstates in phase space are assumed to be equally probed, giving
460 > a properly weighted statistical average. This allows the researcher
461 > freedom of choice when deciding how best to measure a given
462 > observable. In case an ensemble averaged approach sounds most
463 > reasonable, the Monte Carlo techniques\cite{Metropolis1949} can be
464 > utilized. Or if the system lends itself to a time averaging
465 > approach, the Molecular Dynamics techniques in
466 > Sec.~\ref{introSection:molecularDynamics} will be the best
467 > choice\cite{Frenkel1996}.
468  
469 < \section{\label{introSection:molecularDynamics}Molecular Dynamics}
469 > \section{\label{introSection:geometricIntegratos}Geometric Integrators}
470 > A variety of numerical integrators have been proposed to simulate
471 > the motions of atoms in MD simulation. They usually begin with
472 > initial conditionals and move the objects in the direction governed
473 > by the differential equations. However, most of them ignore the
474 > hidden physical laws contained within the equations. Since 1990,
475 > geometric integrators, which preserve various phase-flow invariants
476 > such as symplectic structure, volume and time reversal symmetry, are
477 > developed to address this issue\cite{Dullweber1997, McLachlan1998,
478 > Leimkuhler1999}. The velocity Verlet method, which happens to be a
479 > simple example of symplectic integrator, continues to gain
480 > popularity in the molecular dynamics community. This fact can be
481 > partly explained by its geometric nature.
482  
483 < As a special discipline of molecular modeling, Molecular dynamics
484 < has proven to be a powerful tool for studying the functions of
485 < biological systems, providing structural, thermodynamic and
486 < dynamical information.
483 > \subsection{\label{introSection:symplecticManifold}Symplectic Manifolds}
484 > A \emph{manifold} is an abstract mathematical space. It looks
485 > locally like Euclidean space, but when viewed globally, it may have
486 > more complicated structure. A good example of manifold is the
487 > surface of Earth. It seems to be flat locally, but it is round if
488 > viewed as a whole. A \emph{differentiable manifold} (also known as
489 > \emph{smooth manifold}) is a manifold on which it is possible to
490 > apply calculus on \emph{differentiable manifold}. A \emph{symplectic
491 > manifold} is defined as a pair $(M, \omega)$ which consists of a
492 > \emph{differentiable manifold} $M$ and a close, non-degenerated,
493 > bilinear symplectic form, $\omega$. A symplectic form on a vector
494 > space $V$ is a function $\omega(x, y)$ which satisfies
495 > $\omega(\lambda_1x_1+\lambda_2x_2, y) = \lambda_1\omega(x_1, y)+
496 > \lambda_2\omega(x_2, y)$, $\omega(x, y) = - \omega(y, x)$ and
497 > $\omega(x, x) = 0$. The cross product operation in vector field is
498 > an example of symplectic form. One of the motivations to study
499 > \emph{symplectic manifolds} in Hamiltonian Mechanics is that a
500 > symplectic manifold can represent all possible configurations of the
501 > system and the phase space of the system can be described by it's
502 > cotangent bundle. Every symplectic manifold is even dimensional. For
503 > instance, in Hamilton equations, coordinate and momentum always
504 > appear in pairs.
505  
506 < \subsection{\label{introSec:mdInit}Initialization}
506 > \subsection{\label{introSection:ODE}Ordinary Differential Equations}
507  
508 < \subsection{\label{introSection:mdIntegration} Integration of the Equations of Motion}
508 > For an ordinary differential system defined as
509 > \begin{equation}
510 > \dot x = f(x)
511 > \end{equation}
512 > where $x = x(q,p)^T$, this system is a canonical Hamiltonian, if
513 > \begin{equation}
514 > f(r) = J\nabla _x H(r).
515 > \end{equation}
516 > $H = H (q, p)$ is Hamiltonian function and $J$ is the skew-symmetric
517 > matrix
518 > \begin{equation}
519 > J = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
520 >   0 & I  \\
521 >   { - I} & 0  \\
522 > \end{array}} \right)
523 > \label{introEquation:canonicalMatrix}
524 > \end{equation}
525 > where $I$ is an identity matrix. Using this notation, Hamiltonian
526 > system can be rewritten as,
527 > \begin{equation}
528 > \frac{d}{{dt}}x = J\nabla _x H(x)
529 > \label{introEquation:compactHamiltonian}
530 > \end{equation}In this case, $f$ is
531 > called a \emph{Hamiltonian vector field}. Another generalization of
532 > Hamiltonian dynamics is Poisson Dynamics\cite{Olver1986},
533 > \begin{equation}
534 > \dot x = J(x)\nabla _x H \label{introEquation:poissonHamiltonian}
535 > \end{equation}
536 > The most obvious change being that matrix $J$ now depends on $x$.
537  
538 < \section{\label{introSection:rigidBody}Dynamics of Rigid Bodies}
538 > \subsection{\label{introSection:exactFlow}Exact Flow}
539  
540 < A rigid body is a body in which the distance between any two given
541 < points of a rigid body remains constant regardless of external
542 < forces exerted on it. A rigid body therefore conserves its shape
543 < during its motion.
540 > Let $x(t)$ be the exact solution of the ODE system,
541 > \begin{equation}
542 > \frac{{dx}}{{dt}} = f(x) \label{introEquation:ODE}
543 > \end{equation}
544 > The exact flow(solution) $\varphi_\tau$ is defined by
545 > \[
546 > x(t+\tau) =\varphi_\tau(x(t))
547 > \]
548 > where $\tau$ is a fixed time step and $\varphi$ is a map from phase
549 > space to itself. The flow has the continuous group property,
550 > \begin{equation}
551 > \varphi _{\tau _1 }  \circ \varphi _{\tau _2 }  = \varphi _{\tau _1
552 > + \tau _2 } .
553 > \end{equation}
554 > In particular,
555 > \begin{equation}
556 > \varphi _\tau   \circ \varphi _{ - \tau }  = I
557 > \end{equation}
558 > Therefore, the exact flow is self-adjoint,
559 > \begin{equation}
560 > \varphi _\tau   = \varphi _{ - \tau }^{ - 1}.
561 > \end{equation}
562 > The exact flow can also be written in terms of the of an operator,
563 > \begin{equation}
564 > \varphi _\tau  (x) = e^{\tau \sum\limits_i {f_i (x)\frac{\partial
565 > }{{\partial x_i }}} } (x) \equiv \exp (\tau f)(x).
566 > \label{introEquation:exponentialOperator}
567 > \end{equation}
568  
569 < Applications of dynamics of rigid bodies.
569 > In most cases, it is not easy to find the exact flow $\varphi_\tau$.
570 > Instead, we use an approximate map, $\psi_\tau$, which is usually
571 > called integrator. The order of an integrator $\psi_\tau$ is $p$, if
572 > the Taylor series of $\psi_\tau$ agree to order $p$,
573 > \begin{equation}
574 > \psi_\tau(x) = x + \tau f(x) + O(\tau^{p+1})
575 > \end{equation}
576  
577 < \subsection{\label{introSection:lieAlgebra}Lie Algebra}
577 > \subsection{\label{introSection:geometricProperties}Geometric Properties}
578  
579 < \subsection{\label{introSection:DLMMotionEquation}The Euler Equations of Rigid Body Motion}
579 > The hidden geometric properties\cite{Budd1999, Marsden1998} of an
580 > ODE and its flow play important roles in numerical studies. Many of
581 > them can be found in systems which occur naturally in applications.
582 > Let $\varphi$ be the flow of Hamiltonian vector field, $\varphi$ is
583 > a \emph{symplectic} flow if it satisfies,
584 > \begin{equation}
585 > {\varphi '}^T J \varphi ' = J.
586 > \end{equation}
587 > According to Liouville's theorem, the symplectic volume is invariant
588 > under a Hamiltonian flow, which is the basis for classical
589 > statistical mechanics. Furthermore, the flow of a Hamiltonian vector
590 > field on a symplectic manifold can be shown to be a
591 > symplectomorphism. As to the Poisson system,
592 > \begin{equation}
593 > {\varphi '}^T J \varphi ' = J \circ \varphi
594 > \end{equation}
595 > is the property that must be preserved by the integrator. It is
596 > possible to construct a \emph{volume-preserving} flow for a source
597 > free ODE ($ \nabla \cdot f = 0 $), if the flow satisfies $ \det
598 > d\varphi  = 1$. One can show easily that a symplectic flow will be
599 > volume-preserving. Changing the variables $y = h(x)$ in an ODE
600 > (Eq.~\ref{introEquation:ODE}) will result in a new system,
601 > \[
602 > \dot y = \tilde f(y) = ((dh \cdot f)h^{ - 1} )(y).
603 > \]
604 > The vector filed $f$ has reversing symmetry $h$ if $f = - \tilde f$.
605 > In other words, the flow of this vector field is reversible if and
606 > only if $ h \circ \varphi ^{ - 1}  = \varphi  \circ h $. A
607 > \emph{first integral}, or conserved quantity of a general
608 > differential function is a function $ G:R^{2d}  \to R^d $ which is
609 > constant for all solutions of the ODE $\frac{{dx}}{{dt}} = f(x)$ ,
610 > \[
611 > \frac{{dG(x(t))}}{{dt}} = 0.
612 > \]
613 > Using chain rule, one may obtain,
614 > \[
615 > \sum\limits_i {\frac{{dG}}{{dx_i }}} f_i (x) = f \bullet \nabla G,
616 > \]
617 > which is the condition for conserving \emph{first integral}. For a
618 > canonical Hamiltonian system, the time evolution of an arbitrary
619 > smooth function $G$ is given by,
620 > \begin{eqnarray}
621 > \frac{{dG(x(t))}}{{dt}} & = & [\nabla _x G(x(t))]^T \dot x(t) \\
622 >                        & = & [\nabla _x G(x(t))]^T J\nabla _x H(x(t)). \\
623 > \label{introEquation:firstIntegral1}
624 > \end{eqnarray}
625 > Using poisson bracket notion, Equation
626 > \ref{introEquation:firstIntegral1} can be rewritten as
627 > \[
628 > \frac{d}{{dt}}G(x(t)) = \left\{ {G,H} \right\}(x(t)).
629 > \]
630 > Therefore, the sufficient condition for $G$ to be the \emph{first
631 > integral} of a Hamiltonian system is
632 > \[
633 > \left\{ {G,H} \right\} = 0.
634 > \]
635 > As well known, the Hamiltonian (or energy) H of a Hamiltonian system
636 > is a \emph{first integral}, which is due to the fact $\{ H,H\}  =
637 > 0$. When designing any numerical methods, one should always try to
638 > preserve the structural properties of the original ODE and its flow.
639  
640 < \subsection{\label{introSection:otherRBMotionEquation}Other Formulations for Rigid Body Motion}
640 > \subsection{\label{introSection:constructionSymplectic}Construction of Symplectic Methods}
641 > A lot of well established and very effective numerical methods have
642 > been successful precisely because of their symplecticities even
643 > though this fact was not recognized when they were first
644 > constructed. The most famous example is the Verlet-leapfrog method
645 > in molecular dynamics. In general, symplectic integrators can be
646 > constructed using one of four different methods.
647 > \begin{enumerate}
648 > \item Generating functions
649 > \item Variational methods
650 > \item Runge-Kutta methods
651 > \item Splitting methods
652 > \end{enumerate}
653  
654 < %\subsection{\label{introSection:poissonBrackets}Poisson Brackets}
654 > Generating function\cite{Channell1990} tends to lead to methods
655 > which are cumbersome and difficult to use. In dissipative systems,
656 > variational methods can capture the decay of energy
657 > accurately\cite{Kane2000}. Since their geometrically unstable nature
658 > against non-Hamiltonian perturbations, ordinary implicit Runge-Kutta
659 > methods are not suitable for Hamiltonian system. Recently, various
660 > high-order explicit Runge-Kutta methods
661 > \cite{Owren1992,Chen2003}have been developed to overcome this
662 > instability. However, due to computational penalty involved in
663 > implementing the Runge-Kutta methods, they have not attracted much
664 > attention from the Molecular Dynamics community. Instead, splitting
665 > methods have been widely accepted since they exploit natural
666 > decompositions of the system\cite{Tuckerman1992, McLachlan1998}.
667  
668 < \section{\label{introSection:correlationFunctions}Correlation Functions}
668 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:splittingMethod}\textbf{Splitting Methods}}
669  
670 < \section{\label{introSection:langevinDynamics}Langevin Dynamics}
670 > The main idea behind splitting methods is to decompose the discrete
671 > $\varphi_h$ as a composition of simpler flows,
672 > \begin{equation}
673 > \varphi _h  = \varphi _{h_1 }  \circ \varphi _{h_2 }  \ldots  \circ
674 > \varphi _{h_n }
675 > \label{introEquation:FlowDecomposition}
676 > \end{equation}
677 > where each of the sub-flow is chosen such that each represent a
678 > simpler integration of the system. Suppose that a Hamiltonian system
679 > takes the form,
680 > \[
681 > H = H_1 + H_2.
682 > \]
683 > Here, $H_1$ and $H_2$ may represent different physical processes of
684 > the system. For instance, they may relate to kinetic and potential
685 > energy respectively, which is a natural decomposition of the
686 > problem. If $H_1$ and $H_2$ can be integrated using exact flows
687 > $\varphi_1(t)$ and $\varphi_2(t)$, respectively, a simple first
688 > order expression is then given by the Lie-Trotter formula
689 > \begin{equation}
690 > \varphi _h  = \varphi _{1,h}  \circ \varphi _{2,h},
691 > \label{introEquation:firstOrderSplitting}
692 > \end{equation}
693 > where $\varphi _h$ is the result of applying the corresponding
694 > continuous $\varphi _i$ over a time $h$. By definition, as
695 > $\varphi_i(t)$ is the exact solution of a Hamiltonian system, it
696 > must follow that each operator $\varphi_i(t)$ is a symplectic map.
697 > It is easy to show that any composition of symplectic flows yields a
698 > symplectic map,
699 > \begin{equation}
700 > (\varphi '\phi ')^T J\varphi '\phi ' = \phi '^T \varphi '^T J\varphi
701 > '\phi ' = \phi '^T J\phi ' = J,
702 > \label{introEquation:SymplecticFlowComposition}
703 > \end{equation}
704 > where $\phi$ and $\psi$ both are symplectic maps. Thus operator
705 > splitting in this context automatically generates a symplectic map.
706  
707 < \subsection{\label{introSection:generalizedLangevinDynamics}Generalized Langevin Dynamics}
707 > The Lie-Trotter splitting(\ref{introEquation:firstOrderSplitting})
708 > introduces local errors proportional to $h^2$, while Strang
709 > splitting gives a second-order decomposition,
710 > \begin{equation}
711 > \varphi _h  = \varphi _{1,h/2}  \circ \varphi _{2,h}  \circ \varphi
712 > _{1,h/2} , \label{introEquation:secondOrderSplitting}
713 > \end{equation}
714 > which has a local error proportional to $h^3$. The Sprang
715 > splitting's popularity in molecular simulation community attribute
716 > to its symmetric property,
717 > \begin{equation}
718 > \varphi _h^{ - 1} = \varphi _{ - h}.
719 > \label{introEquation:timeReversible}
720 > \end{equation}
721  
722 < \subsection{\label{introSection:hydroynamics}Hydrodynamics}
722 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:exampleSplittingMethod}\textbf{Examples of the Splitting Method}}
723 > The classical equation for a system consisting of interacting
724 > particles can be written in Hamiltonian form,
725 > \[
726 > H = T + V
727 > \]
728 > where $T$ is the kinetic energy and $V$ is the potential energy.
729 > Setting $H_1 = T, H_2 = V$ and applying the Strang splitting, one
730 > obtains the following:
731 > \begin{align}
732 > q(\Delta t) &= q(0) + \dot{q}(0)\Delta t +
733 >    \frac{F[q(0)]}{m}\frac{\Delta t^2}{2}, %
734 > \label{introEquation:Lp10a} \\%
735 > %
736 > \dot{q}(\Delta t) &= \dot{q}(0) + \frac{\Delta t}{2m}
737 >    \biggl [F[q(0)] + F[q(\Delta t)] \biggr]. %
738 > \label{introEquation:Lp10b}
739 > \end{align}
740 > where $F(t)$ is the force at time $t$. This integration scheme is
741 > known as \emph{velocity verlet} which is
742 > symplectic(\ref{introEquation:SymplecticFlowComposition}),
743 > time-reversible(\ref{introEquation:timeReversible}) and
744 > volume-preserving (\ref{introEquation:volumePreserving}). These
745 > geometric properties attribute to its long-time stability and its
746 > popularity in the community. However, the most commonly used
747 > velocity verlet integration scheme is written as below,
748 > \begin{align}
749 > \dot{q}\biggl (\frac{\Delta t}{2}\biggr ) &=
750 >    \dot{q}(0) + \frac{\Delta t}{2m}\, F[q(0)], \label{introEquation:Lp9a}\\%
751 > %
752 > q(\Delta t) &= q(0) + \Delta t\, \dot{q}\biggl (\frac{\Delta t}{2}\biggr ),%
753 >    \label{introEquation:Lp9b}\\%
754 > %
755 > \dot{q}(\Delta t) &= \dot{q}\biggl (\frac{\Delta t}{2}\biggr ) +
756 >    \frac{\Delta t}{2m}\, F[q(t)]. \label{introEquation:Lp9c}
757 > \end{align}
758 > From the preceding splitting, one can see that the integration of
759 > the equations of motion would follow:
760 > \begin{enumerate}
761 > \item calculate the velocities at the half step, $\frac{\Delta t}{2}$, from the forces calculated at the initial position.
762 >
763 > \item Use the half step velocities to move positions one whole step, $\Delta t$.
764 >
765 > \item Evaluate the forces at the new positions, $\mathbf{q}(\Delta t)$, and use the new forces to complete the velocity move.
766 >
767 > \item Repeat from step 1 with the new position, velocities, and forces assuming the roles of the initial values.
768 > \end{enumerate}
769 > By simply switching the order of the propagators in the splitting
770 > and composing a new integrator, the \emph{position verlet}
771 > integrator, can be generated,
772 > \begin{align}
773 > \dot q(\Delta t) &= \dot q(0) + \Delta tF(q(0))\left[ {q(0) +
774 > \frac{{\Delta t}}{{2m}}\dot q(0)} \right], %
775 > \label{introEquation:positionVerlet1} \\%
776 > %
777 > q(\Delta t) &= q(0) + \frac{{\Delta t}}{2}\left[ {\dot q(0) + \dot
778 > q(\Delta t)} \right]. %
779 > \label{introEquation:positionVerlet2}
780 > \end{align}
781 >
782 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:errorAnalysis}\textbf{Error Analysis and Higher Order Methods}}
783 >
784 > The Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula can be used to determine the
785 > local error of splitting method in terms of the commutator of the
786 > operators(\ref{introEquation:exponentialOperator}) associated with
787 > the sub-flow. For operators $hX$ and $hY$ which are associated with
788 > $\varphi_1(t)$ and $\varphi_2(t)$ respectively , we have
789 > \begin{equation}
790 > \exp (hX + hY) = \exp (hZ)
791 > \end{equation}
792 > where
793 > \begin{equation}
794 > hZ = hX + hY + \frac{{h^2 }}{2}[X,Y] + \frac{{h^3 }}{2}\left(
795 > {[X,[X,Y]] + [Y,[Y,X]]} \right) +  \ldots .
796 > \end{equation}
797 > Here, $[X,Y]$ is the commutators of operator $X$ and $Y$ given by
798 > \[
799 > [X,Y] = XY - YX .
800 > \]
801 > Applying the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula\cite{Varadarajan1974}
802 > to the Sprang splitting, we can obtain
803 > \begin{eqnarray*}
804 > \exp (h X/2)\exp (h Y)\exp (h X/2) & = & \exp (h X + h Y + h^2 [X,Y]/4 + h^2 [Y,X]/4 \\
805 >                                   &   & \mbox{} + h^2 [X,X]/8 + h^2 [Y,Y]/8 \\
806 >                                   &   & \mbox{} + h^3 [Y,[Y,X]]/12 - h^3[X,[X,Y]]/24 + \ldots )
807 > \end{eqnarray*}
808 > Since \[ [X,Y] + [Y,X] = 0\] and \[ [X,X] = 0,\] the dominant local
809 > error of Spring splitting is proportional to $h^3$. The same
810 > procedure can be applied to a general splitting,  of the form
811 > \begin{equation}
812 > \varphi _{b_m h}^2  \circ \varphi _{a_m h}^1  \circ \varphi _{b_{m -
813 > 1} h}^2  \circ  \ldots  \circ \varphi _{a_1 h}^1 .
814 > \end{equation}
815 > A careful choice of coefficient $a_1 \ldots b_m$ will lead to higher
816 > order methods. Yoshida proposed an elegant way to compose higher
817 > order methods based on symmetric splitting\cite{Yoshida1990}. Given
818 > a symmetric second order base method $ \varphi _h^{(2)} $, a
819 > fourth-order symmetric method can be constructed by composing,
820 > \[
821 > \varphi _h^{(4)}  = \varphi _{\alpha h}^{(2)}  \circ \varphi _{\beta
822 > h}^{(2)}  \circ \varphi _{\alpha h}^{(2)}
823 > \]
824 > where $ \alpha  =  - \frac{{2^{1/3} }}{{2 - 2^{1/3} }}$ and $ \beta
825 > = \frac{{2^{1/3} }}{{2 - 2^{1/3} }}$. Moreover, a symmetric
826 > integrator $ \varphi _h^{(2n + 2)}$ can be composed by
827 > \begin{equation}
828 > \varphi _h^{(2n + 2)}  = \varphi _{\alpha h}^{(2n)}  \circ \varphi
829 > _{\beta h}^{(2n)}  \circ \varphi _{\alpha h}^{(2n)},
830 > \end{equation}
831 > if the weights are chosen as
832 > \[
833 > \alpha  =  - \frac{{2^{1/(2n + 1)} }}{{2 - 2^{1/(2n + 1)} }},\beta =
834 > \frac{{2^{1/(2n + 1)} }}{{2 - 2^{1/(2n + 1)} }} .
835 > \]
836 >
837 > \section{\label{introSection:molecularDynamics}Molecular Dynamics}
838 >
839 > As one of the principal tools of molecular modeling, Molecular
840 > dynamics has proven to be a powerful tool for studying the functions
841 > of biological systems, providing structural, thermodynamic and
842 > dynamical information. The basic idea of molecular dynamics is that
843 > macroscopic properties are related to microscopic behavior and
844 > microscopic behavior can be calculated from the trajectories in
845 > simulations. For instance, instantaneous temperature of an
846 > Hamiltonian system of $N$ particle can be measured by
847 > \[
848 > T = \sum\limits_{i = 1}^N {\frac{{m_i v_i^2 }}{{fk_B }}}
849 > \]
850 > where $m_i$ and $v_i$ are the mass and velocity of $i$th particle
851 > respectively, $f$ is the number of degrees of freedom, and $k_B$ is
852 > the boltzman constant.
853 >
854 > A typical molecular dynamics run consists of three essential steps:
855 > \begin{enumerate}
856 >  \item Initialization
857 >    \begin{enumerate}
858 >    \item Preliminary preparation
859 >    \item Minimization
860 >    \item Heating
861 >    \item Equilibration
862 >    \end{enumerate}
863 >  \item Production
864 >  \item Analysis
865 > \end{enumerate}
866 > These three individual steps will be covered in the following
867 > sections. Sec.~\ref{introSec:initialSystemSettings} deals with the
868 > initialization of a simulation. Sec.~\ref{introSection:production}
869 > will discusse issues in production run.
870 > Sec.~\ref{introSection:Analysis} provides the theoretical tools for
871 > trajectory analysis.
872 >
873 > \subsection{\label{introSec:initialSystemSettings}Initialization}
874 >
875 > \subsubsection{\textbf{Preliminary preparation}}
876 >
877 > When selecting the starting structure of a molecule for molecular
878 > simulation, one may retrieve its Cartesian coordinates from public
879 > databases, such as RCSB Protein Data Bank \textit{etc}. Although
880 > thousands of crystal structures of molecules are discovered every
881 > year, many more remain unknown due to the difficulties of
882 > purification and crystallization. Even for molecules with known
883 > structure, some important information is missing. For example, a
884 > missing hydrogen atom which acts as donor in hydrogen bonding must
885 > be added. Moreover, in order to include electrostatic interaction,
886 > one may need to specify the partial charges for individual atoms.
887 > Under some circumstances, we may even need to prepare the system in
888 > a special configuration. For instance, when studying transport
889 > phenomenon in membrane systems, we may prepare the lipids in a
890 > bilayer structure instead of placing lipids randomly in solvent,
891 > since we are not interested in the slow self-aggregation process.
892 >
893 > \subsubsection{\textbf{Minimization}}
894 >
895 > It is quite possible that some of molecules in the system from
896 > preliminary preparation may be overlapping with each other. This
897 > close proximity leads to high initial potential energy which
898 > consequently jeopardizes any molecular dynamics simulations. To
899 > remove these steric overlaps, one typically performs energy
900 > minimization to find a more reasonable conformation. Several energy
901 > minimization methods have been developed to exploit the energy
902 > surface and to locate the local minimum. While converging slowly
903 > near the minimum, steepest descent method is extremely robust when
904 > systems are strongly anharmonic. Thus, it is often used to refine
905 > structure from crystallographic data. Relied on the gradient or
906 > hessian, advanced methods like Newton-Raphson converge rapidly to a
907 > local minimum, but become unstable if the energy surface is far from
908 > quadratic. Another factor that must be taken into account, when
909 > choosing energy minimization method, is the size of the system.
910 > Steepest descent and conjugate gradient can deal with models of any
911 > size. Because of the limits on computer memory to store the hessian
912 > matrix and the computing power needed to diagonalized these
913 > matrices, most Newton-Raphson methods can not be used with very
914 > large systems.
915 >
916 > \subsubsection{\textbf{Heating}}
917 >
918 > Typically, Heating is performed by assigning random velocities
919 > according to a Maxwell-Boltzman distribution for a desired
920 > temperature. Beginning at a lower temperature and gradually
921 > increasing the temperature by assigning larger random velocities, we
922 > end up with setting the temperature of the system to a final
923 > temperature at which the simulation will be conducted. In heating
924 > phase, we should also keep the system from drifting or rotating as a
925 > whole. To do this, the net linear momentum and angular momentum of
926 > the system is shifted to zero after each resampling from the Maxwell
927 > -Boltzman distribution.
928 >
929 > \subsubsection{\textbf{Equilibration}}
930 >
931 > The purpose of equilibration is to allow the system to evolve
932 > spontaneously for a period of time and reach equilibrium. The
933 > procedure is continued until various statistical properties, such as
934 > temperature, pressure, energy, volume and other structural
935 > properties \textit{etc}, become independent of time. Strictly
936 > speaking, minimization and heating are not necessary, provided the
937 > equilibration process is long enough. However, these steps can serve
938 > as a means to arrive at an equilibrated structure in an effective
939 > way.
940 >
941 > \subsection{\label{introSection:production}Production}
942 >
943 > The production run is the most important step of the simulation, in
944 > which the equilibrated structure is used as a starting point and the
945 > motions of the molecules are collected for later analysis. In order
946 > to capture the macroscopic properties of the system, the molecular
947 > dynamics simulation must be performed by sampling correctly and
948 > efficiently from the relevant thermodynamic ensemble.
949 >
950 > The most expensive part of a molecular dynamics simulation is the
951 > calculation of non-bonded forces, such as van der Waals force and
952 > Coulombic forces \textit{etc}. For a system of $N$ particles, the
953 > complexity of the algorithm for pair-wise interactions is $O(N^2 )$,
954 > which making large simulations prohibitive in the absence of any
955 > algorithmic tricks.
956 >
957 > A natural approach to avoid system size issues is to represent the
958 > bulk behavior by a finite number of the particles. However, this
959 > approach will suffer from the surface effect at the edges of the
960 > simulation. To offset this, \textit{Periodic boundary conditions}
961 > (see Fig.~\ref{introFig:pbc}) is developed to simulate bulk
962 > properties with a relatively small number of particles. In this
963 > method, the simulation box is replicated throughout space to form an
964 > infinite lattice. During the simulation, when a particle moves in
965 > the primary cell, its image in other cells move in exactly the same
966 > direction with exactly the same orientation. Thus, as a particle
967 > leaves the primary cell, one of its images will enter through the
968 > opposite face.
969 > \begin{figure}
970 > \centering
971 > \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{pbc.eps}
972 > \caption[An illustration of periodic boundary conditions]{A 2-D
973 > illustration of periodic boundary conditions. As one particle leaves
974 > the left of the simulation box, an image of it enters the right.}
975 > \label{introFig:pbc}
976 > \end{figure}
977 >
978 > %cutoff and minimum image convention
979 > Another important technique to improve the efficiency of force
980 > evaluation is to apply spherical cutoff where particles farther than
981 > a predetermined distance are not included in the calculation
982 > \cite{Frenkel1996}. The use of a cutoff radius will cause a
983 > discontinuity in the potential energy curve. Fortunately, one can
984 > shift simple radial potential to ensure the potential curve go
985 > smoothly to zero at the cutoff radius. The cutoff strategy works
986 > well for Lennard-Jones interaction because of its short range
987 > nature. However, simply truncating the electrostatic interaction
988 > with the use of cutoffs has been shown to lead to severe artifacts
989 > in simulations. The Ewald summation, in which the slowly decaying
990 > Coulomb potential is transformed into direct and reciprocal sums
991 > with rapid and absolute convergence, has proved to minimize the
992 > periodicity artifacts in liquid simulations. Taking the advantages
993 > of the fast Fourier transform (FFT) for calculating discrete Fourier
994 > transforms, the particle mesh-based
995 > methods\cite{Hockney1981,Shimada1993, Luty1994} are accelerated from
996 > $O(N^{3/2})$ to $O(N logN)$. An alternative approach is the
997 > \emph{fast multipole method}\cite{Greengard1987, Greengard1994},
998 > which treats Coulombic interactions exactly at short range, and
999 > approximate the potential at long range through multipolar
1000 > expansion. In spite of their wide acceptance at the molecular
1001 > simulation community, these two methods are difficult to implement
1002 > correctly and efficiently. Instead, we use a damped and
1003 > charge-neutralized Coulomb potential method developed by Wolf and
1004 > his coworkers\cite{Wolf1999}. The shifted Coulomb potential for
1005 > particle $i$ and particle $j$ at distance $r_{rj}$ is given by:
1006 > \begin{equation}
1007 > V(r_{ij})= \frac{q_i q_j \textrm{erfc}(\alpha
1008 > r_{ij})}{r_{ij}}-\lim_{r_{ij}\rightarrow
1009 > R_\textrm{c}}\left\{\frac{q_iq_j \textrm{erfc}(\alpha
1010 > r_{ij})}{r_{ij}}\right\}. \label{introEquation:shiftedCoulomb}
1011 > \end{equation}
1012 > where $\alpha$ is the convergence parameter. Due to the lack of
1013 > inherent periodicity and rapid convergence,this method is extremely
1014 > efficient and easy to implement.
1015 > \begin{figure}
1016 > \centering
1017 > \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{shifted_coulomb.eps}
1018 > \caption[An illustration of shifted Coulomb potential]{An
1019 > illustration of shifted Coulomb potential.}
1020 > \label{introFigure:shiftedCoulomb}
1021 > \end{figure}
1022 >
1023 > %multiple time step
1024 >
1025 > \subsection{\label{introSection:Analysis} Analysis}
1026 >
1027 > Recently, advanced visualization technique have become applied to
1028 > monitor the motions of molecules. Although the dynamics of the
1029 > system can be described qualitatively from animation, quantitative
1030 > trajectory analysis are more useful. According to the principles of
1031 > Statistical Mechanics, Sec.~\ref{introSection:statisticalMechanics},
1032 > one can compute thermodynamic properties, analyze fluctuations of
1033 > structural parameters, and investigate time-dependent processes of
1034 > the molecule from the trajectories.
1035 >
1036 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:thermodynamicsProperties}\textbf{Thermodynamic Properties}}
1037 >
1038 > Thermodynamic properties, which can be expressed in terms of some
1039 > function of the coordinates and momenta of all particles in the
1040 > system, can be directly computed from molecular dynamics. The usual
1041 > way to measure the pressure is based on virial theorem of Clausius
1042 > which states that the virial is equal to $-3Nk_BT$. For a system
1043 > with forces between particles, the total virial, $W$, contains the
1044 > contribution from external pressure and interaction between the
1045 > particles:
1046 > \[
1047 > W =  - 3PV + \left\langle {\sum\limits_{i < j} {r{}_{ij} \cdot
1048 > f_{ij} } } \right\rangle
1049 > \]
1050 > where $f_{ij}$ is the force between particle $i$ and $j$ at a
1051 > distance $r_{ij}$. Thus, the expression for the pressure is given
1052 > by:
1053 > \begin{equation}
1054 > P = \frac{{Nk_B T}}{V} - \frac{1}{{3V}}\left\langle {\sum\limits_{i
1055 > < j} {r{}_{ij} \cdot f_{ij} } } \right\rangle
1056 > \end{equation}
1057 >
1058 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:structuralProperties}\textbf{Structural Properties}}
1059 >
1060 > Structural Properties of a simple fluid can be described by a set of
1061 > distribution functions. Among these functions,the \emph{pair
1062 > distribution function}, also known as \emph{radial distribution
1063 > function}, is of most fundamental importance to liquid theory.
1064 > Experimentally, pair distribution function can be gathered by
1065 > Fourier transforming raw data from a series of neutron diffraction
1066 > experiments and integrating over the surface factor
1067 > \cite{Powles1973}. The experimental results can serve as a criterion
1068 > to justify the correctness of a liquid model. Moreover, various
1069 > equilibrium thermodynamic and structural properties can also be
1070 > expressed in terms of radial distribution function \cite{Allen1987}.
1071 > The pair distribution functions $g(r)$ gives the probability that a
1072 > particle $i$ will be located at a distance $r$ from a another
1073 > particle $j$ in the system
1074 > \[
1075 > g(r) = \frac{V}{{N^2 }}\left\langle {\sum\limits_i {\sum\limits_{j
1076 > \ne i} {\delta (r - r_{ij} )} } } \right\rangle = \frac{\rho
1077 > (r)}{\rho}.
1078 > \]
1079 > Note that the delta function can be replaced by a histogram in
1080 > computer simulation. Peaks in $g(r)$ represent solvent shells, and
1081 > the height of these peaks gradually decreases to 1 as the liquid of
1082 > large distance approaches the bulk density.
1083 >
1084 >
1085 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:timeDependentProperties}\textbf{Time-dependent
1086 > Properties}}
1087 >
1088 > Time-dependent properties are usually calculated using \emph{time
1089 > correlation functions}, which correlate random variables $A$ and $B$
1090 > at two different times,
1091 > \begin{equation}
1092 > C_{AB} (t) = \left\langle {A(t)B(0)} \right\rangle.
1093 > \label{introEquation:timeCorrelationFunction}
1094 > \end{equation}
1095 > If $A$ and $B$ refer to same variable, this kind of correlation
1096 > function is called an \emph{autocorrelation function}. One example
1097 > of an auto correlation function is the velocity auto-correlation
1098 > function which is directly related to transport properties of
1099 > molecular liquids:
1100 > \[
1101 > D = \frac{1}{3}\int\limits_0^\infty  {\left\langle {v(t) \cdot v(0)}
1102 > \right\rangle } dt
1103 > \]
1104 > where $D$ is diffusion constant. Unlike the velocity autocorrelation
1105 > function, which is averaging over time origins and over all the
1106 > atoms, the dipole autocorrelation functions are calculated for the
1107 > entire system. The dipole autocorrelation function is given by:
1108 > \[
1109 > c_{dipole}  = \left\langle {u_{tot} (t) \cdot u_{tot} (t)}
1110 > \right\rangle
1111 > \]
1112 > Here $u_{tot}$ is the net dipole of the entire system and is given
1113 > by
1114 > \[
1115 > u_{tot} (t) = \sum\limits_i {u_i (t)}
1116 > \]
1117 > In principle, many time correlation functions can be related with
1118 > Fourier transforms of the infrared, Raman, and inelastic neutron
1119 > scattering spectra of molecular liquids. In practice, one can
1120 > extract the IR spectrum from the intensity of dipole fluctuation at
1121 > each frequency using the following relationship:
1122 > \[
1123 > \hat c_{dipole} (v) = \int_{ - \infty }^\infty  {c_{dipole} (t)e^{ -
1124 > i2\pi vt} dt}
1125 > \]
1126 >
1127 > \section{\label{introSection:rigidBody}Dynamics of Rigid Bodies}
1128 >
1129 > Rigid bodies are frequently involved in the modeling of different
1130 > areas, from engineering, physics, to chemistry. For example,
1131 > missiles and vehicle are usually modeled by rigid bodies.  The
1132 > movement of the objects in 3D gaming engine or other physics
1133 > simulator is governed by rigid body dynamics. In molecular
1134 > simulations, rigid bodies are used to simplify protein-protein
1135 > docking studies\cite{Gray2003}.
1136 >
1137 > It is very important to develop stable and efficient methods to
1138 > integrate the equations of motion for orientational degrees of
1139 > freedom. Euler angles are the natural choice to describe the
1140 > rotational degrees of freedom. However, due to $\frac {1}{sin
1141 > \theta}$ singularities, the numerical integration of corresponding
1142 > equations of motion is very inefficient and inaccurate. Although an
1143 > alternative integrator using multiple sets of Euler angles can
1144 > overcome this difficulty\cite{Barojas1973}, the computational
1145 > penalty and the loss of angular momentum conservation still remain.
1146 > A singularity-free representation utilizing quaternions was
1147 > developed by Evans in 1977\cite{Evans1977}. Unfortunately, this
1148 > approach uses a nonseparable Hamiltonian resulting from the
1149 > quaternion representation, which prevents the symplectic algorithm
1150 > to be utilized. Another different approach is to apply holonomic
1151 > constraints to the atoms belonging to the rigid body. Each atom
1152 > moves independently under the normal forces deriving from potential
1153 > energy and constraint forces which are used to guarantee the
1154 > rigidness. However, due to their iterative nature, the SHAKE and
1155 > Rattle algorithms also converge very slowly when the number of
1156 > constraints increases\cite{Ryckaert1977, Andersen1983}.
1157 >
1158 > A break-through in geometric literature suggests that, in order to
1159 > develop a long-term integration scheme, one should preserve the
1160 > symplectic structure of the flow. By introducing a conjugate
1161 > momentum to the rotation matrix $Q$ and re-formulating Hamiltonian's
1162 > equation, a symplectic integrator, RSHAKE\cite{Kol1997}, was
1163 > proposed to evolve the Hamiltonian system in a constraint manifold
1164 > by iteratively satisfying the orthogonality constraint $Q^T Q = 1$.
1165 > An alternative method using the quaternion representation was
1166 > developed by Omelyan\cite{Omelyan1998}. However, both of these
1167 > methods are iterative and inefficient. In this section, we descibe a
1168 > symplectic Lie-Poisson integrator for rigid body developed by
1169 > Dullweber and his coworkers\cite{Dullweber1997} in depth.
1170 >
1171 > \subsection{\label{introSection:constrainedHamiltonianRB}Constrained Hamiltonian for Rigid Bodies}
1172 > The motion of a rigid body is Hamiltonian with the Hamiltonian
1173 > function
1174 > \begin{equation}
1175 > H = \frac{1}{2}(p^T m^{ - 1} p) + \frac{1}{2}tr(PJ^{ - 1} P) +
1176 > V(q,Q) + \frac{1}{2}tr[(QQ^T  - 1)\Lambda ].
1177 > \label{introEquation:RBHamiltonian}
1178 > \end{equation}
1179 > Here, $q$ and $Q$  are the position and rotation matrix for the
1180 > rigid-body, $p$ and $P$  are conjugate momenta to $q$  and $Q$ , and
1181 > $J$, a diagonal matrix, is defined by
1182 > \[
1183 > I_{ii}^{ - 1}  = \frac{1}{2}\sum\limits_{i \ne j} {J_{jj}^{ - 1} }
1184 > \]
1185 > where $I_{ii}$ is the diagonal element of the inertia tensor. This
1186 > constrained Hamiltonian equation is subjected to a holonomic
1187 > constraint,
1188 > \begin{equation}
1189 > Q^T Q = 1, \label{introEquation:orthogonalConstraint}
1190 > \end{equation}
1191 > which is used to ensure rotation matrix's unitarity. Differentiating
1192 > \ref{introEquation:orthogonalConstraint} and using Equation
1193 > \ref{introEquation:RBMotionMomentum}, one may obtain,
1194 > \begin{equation}
1195 > Q^T PJ^{ - 1}  + J^{ - 1} P^T Q = 0 . \\
1196 > \label{introEquation:RBFirstOrderConstraint}
1197 > \end{equation}
1198 > Using Equation (\ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianCoordinate},
1199 > \ref{introEquation:motionHamiltonianMomentum}), one can write down
1200 > the equations of motion,
1201 > \begin{eqnarray}
1202 > \frac{{dq}}{{dt}} & = & \frac{p}{m} \label{introEquation:RBMotionPosition}\\
1203 > \frac{{dp}}{{dt}} & = & - \nabla _q V(q,Q) \label{introEquation:RBMotionMomentum}\\
1204 > \frac{{dQ}}{{dt}} & = & PJ^{ - 1}  \label{introEquation:RBMotionRotation}\\
1205 > \frac{{dP}}{{dt}} & = & - \nabla _Q V(q,Q) - 2Q\Lambda . \label{introEquation:RBMotionP}
1206 > \end{eqnarray}
1207 > In general, there are two ways to satisfy the holonomic constraints.
1208 > We can use a constraint force provided by a Lagrange multiplier on
1209 > the normal manifold to keep the motion on constraint space. Or we
1210 > can simply evolve the system on the constraint manifold. These two
1211 > methods have been proved to be equivalent. The holonomic constraint
1212 > and equations of motions define a constraint manifold for rigid
1213 > bodies
1214 > \[
1215 > M = \left\{ {(Q,P):Q^T Q = 1,Q^T PJ^{ - 1}  + J^{ - 1} P^T Q = 0}
1216 > \right\}.
1217 > \]
1218 > Unfortunately, this constraint manifold is not the cotangent bundle
1219 > $T^* SO(3)$ which can be consider as a symplectic manifold on Lie
1220 > rotation group $SO(3)$. However, it turns out that under symplectic
1221 > transformation, the cotangent space and the phase space are
1222 > diffeomorphic. By introducing
1223 > \[
1224 > \tilde Q = Q,\tilde P = \frac{1}{2}\left( {P - QP^T Q} \right),
1225 > \]
1226 > the mechanical system subject to a holonomic constraint manifold $M$
1227 > can be re-formulated as a Hamiltonian system on the cotangent space
1228 > \[
1229 > T^* SO(3) = \left\{ {(\tilde Q,\tilde P):\tilde Q^T \tilde Q =
1230 > 1,\tilde Q^T \tilde PJ^{ - 1}  + J^{ - 1} P^T \tilde Q = 0} \right\}
1231 > \]
1232 > For a body fixed vector $X_i$ with respect to the center of mass of
1233 > the rigid body, its corresponding lab fixed vector $X_0^{lab}$  is
1234 > given as
1235 > \begin{equation}
1236 > X_i^{lab} = Q X_i + q.
1237 > \end{equation}
1238 > Therefore, potential energy $V(q,Q)$ is defined by
1239 > \[
1240 > V(q,Q) = V(Q X_0 + q).
1241 > \]
1242 > Hence, the force and torque are given by
1243 > \[
1244 > \nabla _q V(q,Q) = F(q,Q) = \sum\limits_i {F_i (q,Q)},
1245 > \]
1246 > and
1247 > \[
1248 > \nabla _Q V(q,Q) = F(q,Q)X_i^t
1249 > \]
1250 > respectively. As a common choice to describe the rotation dynamics
1251 > of the rigid body, the angular momentum on the body fixed frame $\Pi
1252 > = Q^t P$ is introduced to rewrite the equations of motion,
1253 > \begin{equation}
1254 > \begin{array}{l}
1255 > \dot \Pi  = J^{ - 1} \Pi ^T \Pi  + Q^T \sum\limits_i {F_i (q,Q)X_i^T }  - \Lambda,  \\
1256 > \dot Q  = Q\Pi {\rm{ }}J^{ - 1},  \\
1257 > \end{array}
1258 > \label{introEqaution:RBMotionPI}
1259 > \end{equation}
1260 > as well as holonomic constraints,
1261 > \[
1262 > \begin{array}{l}
1263 > \Pi J^{ - 1}  + J^{ - 1} \Pi ^t  = 0, \\
1264 > Q^T Q = 1 .\\
1265 > \end{array}
1266 > \]
1267 > For a vector $v(v_1 ,v_2 ,v_3 ) \in R^3$ and a matrix $\hat v \in
1268 > so(3)^ \star$, the hat-map isomorphism,
1269 > \begin{equation}
1270 > v(v_1 ,v_2 ,v_3 ) \Leftrightarrow \hat v = \left(
1271 > {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
1272 >   0 & { - v_3 } & {v_2 }  \\
1273 >   {v_3 } & 0 & { - v_1 }  \\
1274 >   { - v_2 } & {v_1 } & 0  \\
1275 > \end{array}} \right),
1276 > \label{introEquation:hatmapIsomorphism}
1277 > \end{equation}
1278 > will let us associate the matrix products with traditional vector
1279 > operations
1280 > \[
1281 > \hat vu = v \times u.
1282 > \]
1283 > Using Eq.~\ref{introEqaution:RBMotionPI}, one can construct a skew
1284 > matrix,
1285 > \begin{eqnarray}
1286 > (\dot \Pi  - \dot \Pi ^T ){\rm{ }} &= &{\rm{ }}(\Pi  - \Pi ^T ){\rm{
1287 > }}(J^{ - 1} \Pi  + \Pi J^{ - 1} ) \notag \\
1288 > + \sum\limits_i {[Q^T F_i
1289 > (r,Q)X_i^T  - X_i F_i (r,Q)^T Q]}  - (\Lambda  - \Lambda ^T ).
1290 > \label{introEquation:skewMatrixPI}
1291 > \end{eqnarray}
1292 > Since $\Lambda$ is symmetric, the last term of
1293 > Eq.~\ref{introEquation:skewMatrixPI} is zero, which implies the
1294 > Lagrange multiplier $\Lambda$ is absent from the equations of
1295 > motion. This unique property eliminates the requirement of
1296 > iterations which can not be avoided in other methods\cite{Kol1997,
1297 > Omelyan1998}. Applying the hat-map isomorphism, we obtain the
1298 > equation of motion for angular momentum on body frame
1299 > \begin{equation}
1300 > \dot \pi  = \pi  \times I^{ - 1} \pi  + \sum\limits_i {\left( {Q^T
1301 > F_i (r,Q)} \right) \times X_i }.
1302 > \label{introEquation:bodyAngularMotion}
1303 > \end{equation}
1304 > In the same manner, the equation of motion for rotation matrix is
1305 > given by
1306 > \[
1307 > \dot Q = Qskew(I^{ - 1} \pi ).
1308 > \]
1309 >
1310 > \subsection{\label{introSection:SymplecticFreeRB}Symplectic
1311 > Lie-Poisson Integrator for Free Rigid Body}
1312 >
1313 > If there are no external forces exerted on the rigid body, the only
1314 > contribution to the rotational motion is from the kinetic energy
1315 > (the first term of \ref{introEquation:bodyAngularMotion}). The free
1316 > rigid body is an example of a Lie-Poisson system with Hamiltonian
1317 > function
1318 > \begin{equation}
1319 > T^r (\pi ) = T_1 ^r (\pi _1 ) + T_2^r (\pi _2 ) + T_3^r (\pi _3 )
1320 > \label{introEquation:rotationalKineticRB}
1321 > \end{equation}
1322 > where $T_i^r (\pi _i ) = \frac{{\pi _i ^2 }}{{2I_i }}$ and
1323 > Lie-Poisson structure matrix,
1324 > \begin{equation}
1325 > J(\pi ) = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
1326 >   0 & {\pi _3 } & { - \pi _2 }  \\
1327 >   { - \pi _3 } & 0 & {\pi _1 }  \\
1328 >   {\pi _2 } & { - \pi _1 } & 0  \\
1329 > \end{array}} \right).
1330 > \end{equation}
1331 > Thus, the dynamics of free rigid body is governed by
1332 > \begin{equation}
1333 > \frac{d}{{dt}}\pi  = J(\pi )\nabla _\pi  T^r (\pi ).
1334 > \end{equation}
1335 > One may notice that each $T_i^r$ in Equation
1336 > \ref{introEquation:rotationalKineticRB} can be solved exactly. For
1337 > instance, the equations of motion due to $T_1^r$ are given by
1338 > \begin{equation}
1339 > \frac{d}{{dt}}\pi  = R_1 \pi ,\frac{d}{{dt}}Q = QR_1
1340 > \label{introEqaution:RBMotionSingleTerm}
1341 > \end{equation}
1342 > where
1343 > \[ R_1  = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
1344 >   0 & 0 & 0  \\
1345 >   0 & 0 & {\pi _1 }  \\
1346 >   0 & { - \pi _1 } & 0  \\
1347 > \end{array}} \right).
1348 > \]
1349 > The solutions of Equation \ref{introEqaution:RBMotionSingleTerm} is
1350 > \[
1351 > \pi (\Delta t) = e^{\Delta tR_1 } \pi (0),Q(\Delta t) =
1352 > Q(0)e^{\Delta tR_1 }
1353 > \]
1354 > with
1355 > \[
1356 > e^{\Delta tR_1 }  = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c}
1357 >   0 & 0 & 0  \\
1358 >   0 & {\cos \theta _1 } & {\sin \theta _1 }  \\
1359 >   0 & { - \sin \theta _1 } & {\cos \theta _1 }  \\
1360 > \end{array}} \right),\theta _1  = \frac{{\pi _1 }}{{I_1 }}\Delta t.
1361 > \]
1362 > To reduce the cost of computing expensive functions in $e^{\Delta
1363 > tR_1 }$, we can use Cayley transformation to obtain a single-aixs
1364 > propagator,
1365 > \[
1366 > e^{\Delta tR_1 }  \approx (1 - \Delta tR_1 )^{ - 1} (1 + \Delta tR_1
1367 > ).
1368 > \]
1369 > The flow maps for $T_2^r$ and $T_3^r$ can be found in the same
1370 > manner. In order to construct a second-order symplectic method, we
1371 > split the angular kinetic Hamiltonian function can into five terms
1372 > \[
1373 > T^r (\pi ) = \frac{1}{2}T_1 ^r (\pi _1 ) + \frac{1}{2}T_2^r (\pi _2
1374 > ) + T_3^r (\pi _3 ) + \frac{1}{2}T_2^r (\pi _2 ) + \frac{1}{2}T_1 ^r
1375 > (\pi _1 ).
1376 > \]
1377 > By concatenating the propagators corresponding to these five terms,
1378 > we can obtain an symplectic integrator,
1379 > \[
1380 > \varphi _{\Delta t,T^r }  = \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _1 }  \circ
1381 > \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _2 }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t,\pi _3 }
1382 > \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _2 }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi
1383 > _1 }.
1384 > \]
1385 > The non-canonical Lie-Poisson bracket ${F, G}$ of two function
1386 > $F(\pi )$ and $G(\pi )$ is defined by
1387 > \[
1388 > \{ F,G\} (\pi ) = [\nabla _\pi  F(\pi )]^T J(\pi )\nabla _\pi  G(\pi
1389 > ).
1390 > \]
1391 > If the Poisson bracket of a function $F$ with an arbitrary smooth
1392 > function $G$ is zero, $F$ is a \emph{Casimir}, which is the
1393 > conserved quantity in Poisson system. We can easily verify that the
1394 > norm of the angular momentum, $\parallel \pi
1395 > \parallel$, is a \emph{Casimir}. Let$ F(\pi ) = S(\frac{{\parallel
1396 > \pi \parallel ^2 }}{2})$ for an arbitrary function $ S:R \to R$ ,
1397 > then by the chain rule
1398 > \[
1399 > \nabla _\pi  F(\pi ) = S'(\frac{{\parallel \pi \parallel ^2
1400 > }}{2})\pi.
1401 > \]
1402 > Thus, $ [\nabla _\pi  F(\pi )]^T J(\pi ) =  - S'(\frac{{\parallel
1403 > \pi
1404 > \parallel ^2 }}{2})\pi  \times \pi  = 0 $. This explicit
1405 > Lie-Poisson integrator is found to be both extremely efficient and
1406 > stable. These properties can be explained by the fact the small
1407 > angle approximation is used and the norm of the angular momentum is
1408 > conserved.
1409 >
1410 > \subsection{\label{introSection:RBHamiltonianSplitting} Hamiltonian
1411 > Splitting for Rigid Body}
1412 >
1413 > The Hamiltonian of rigid body can be separated in terms of kinetic
1414 > energy and potential energy,
1415 > \[
1416 > H = T(p,\pi ) + V(q,Q).
1417 > \]
1418 > The equations of motion corresponding to potential energy and
1419 > kinetic energy are listed in the below table,
1420 > \begin{table}
1421 > \caption{EQUATIONS OF MOTION DUE TO POTENTIAL AND KINETIC ENERGIES}
1422 > \begin{center}
1423 > \begin{tabular}{|l|l|}
1424 >  \hline
1425 >  % after \\: \hline or \cline{col1-col2} \cline{col3-col4} ...
1426 >  Potential & Kinetic \\
1427 >  $\frac{{dq}}{{dt}} = \frac{p}{m}$ & $\frac{d}{{dt}}q = p$ \\
1428 >  $\frac{d}{{dt}}p =  - \frac{{\partial V}}{{\partial q}}$ & $ \frac{d}{{dt}}p = 0$ \\
1429 >  $\frac{d}{{dt}}Q = 0$ & $ \frac{d}{{dt}}Q = Qskew(I^{ - 1} j)$ \\
1430 >  $ \frac{d}{{dt}}\pi  = \sum\limits_i {\left( {Q^T F_i (r,Q)} \right) \times X_i }$ & $\frac{d}{{dt}}\pi  = \pi  \times I^{ - 1} \pi$\\
1431 >  \hline
1432 > \end{tabular}
1433 > \end{center}
1434 > \end{table}
1435 > A second-order symplectic method is now obtained by the composition
1436 > of the position and velocity propagators,
1437 > \[
1438 > \varphi _{\Delta t}  = \varphi _{\Delta t/2,V}  \circ \varphi
1439 > _{\Delta t,T}  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,V}.
1440 > \]
1441 > Moreover, $\varphi _{\Delta t/2,V}$ can be divided into two
1442 > sub-propagators which corresponding to force and torque
1443 > respectively,
1444 > \[
1445 > \varphi _{\Delta t/2,V}  = \varphi _{\Delta t/2,F}  \circ \varphi
1446 > _{\Delta t/2,\tau }.
1447 > \]
1448 > Since the associated operators of $\varphi _{\Delta t/2,F} $ and
1449 > $\circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\tau }$ commute, the composition order
1450 > inside $\varphi _{\Delta t/2,V}$ does not matter. Furthermore, the
1451 > kinetic energy can be separated to translational kinetic term, $T^t
1452 > (p)$, and rotational kinetic term, $T^r (\pi )$,
1453 > \begin{equation}
1454 > T(p,\pi ) =T^t (p) + T^r (\pi ).
1455 > \end{equation}
1456 > where $ T^t (p) = \frac{1}{2}p^T m^{ - 1} p $ and $T^r (\pi )$ is
1457 > defined by \ref{introEquation:rotationalKineticRB}. Therefore, the
1458 > corresponding propagators are given by
1459 > \[
1460 > \varphi _{\Delta t,T}  = \varphi _{\Delta t,T^t }  \circ \varphi
1461 > _{\Delta t,T^r }.
1462 > \]
1463 > Finally, we obtain the overall symplectic propagators for freely
1464 > moving rigid bodies
1465 > \begin{eqnarray*}
1466 > \varphi _{\Delta t}  &=& \varphi _{\Delta t/2,F}  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\tau }  \\
1467 >  & & \circ \varphi _{\Delta t,T^t }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _1 }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _2 }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t,\pi _3 }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _2 }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\pi _1 }  \\
1468 >  & & \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,\tau }  \circ \varphi _{\Delta t/2,F}  .\\
1469 > \label{introEquation:overallRBFlowMaps}
1470 > \end{eqnarray*}
1471 >
1472 > \section{\label{introSection:langevinDynamics}Langevin Dynamics}
1473 > As an alternative to newtonian dynamics, Langevin dynamics, which
1474 > mimics a simple heat bath with stochastic and dissipative forces,
1475 > has been applied in a variety of studies. This section will review
1476 > the theory of Langevin dynamics. A brief derivation of generalized
1477 > Langevin equation will be given first. Following that, we will
1478 > discuss the physical meaning of the terms appearing in the equation
1479 > as well as the calculation of friction tensor from hydrodynamics
1480 > theory.
1481 >
1482 > \subsection{\label{introSection:generalizedLangevinDynamics}Derivation of Generalized Langevin Equation}
1483 >
1484 > A harmonic bath model, in which an effective set of harmonic
1485 > oscillators are used to mimic the effect of a linearly responding
1486 > environment, has been widely used in quantum chemistry and
1487 > statistical mechanics. One of the successful applications of
1488 > Harmonic bath model is the derivation of the Generalized Langevin
1489 > Dynamics (GLE). Lets consider a system, in which the degree of
1490 > freedom $x$ is assumed to couple to the bath linearly, giving a
1491 > Hamiltonian of the form
1492 > \begin{equation}
1493 > H = \frac{{p^2 }}{{2m}} + U(x) + H_B  + \Delta U(x,x_1 , \ldots x_N)
1494 > \label{introEquation:bathGLE}.
1495 > \end{equation}
1496 > Here $p$ is a momentum conjugate to $x$, $m$ is the mass associated
1497 > with this degree of freedom, $H_B$ is a harmonic bath Hamiltonian,
1498 > \[
1499 > H_B  = \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{ {\frac{{p_\alpha ^2
1500 > }}{{2m_\alpha  }} + \frac{1}{2}m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }
1501 > \right\}}
1502 > \]
1503 > where the index $\alpha$ runs over all the bath degrees of freedom,
1504 > $\omega _\alpha$ are the harmonic bath frequencies, $m_\alpha$ are
1505 > the harmonic bath masses, and $\Delta U$ is a bilinear system-bath
1506 > coupling,
1507 > \[
1508 > \Delta U =  - \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {g_\alpha  x_\alpha  x}
1509 > \]
1510 > where $g_\alpha$ are the coupling constants between the bath
1511 > coordinates ($x_ \alpha$) and the system coordinate ($x$).
1512 > Introducing
1513 > \[
1514 > W(x) = U(x) - \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\frac{{g_\alpha ^2
1515 > }}{{2m_\alpha  w_\alpha ^2 }}} x^2
1516 > \]
1517 > and combining the last two terms in Eq.~\ref{introEquation:bathGLE}, we may rewrite the Harmonic bath Hamiltonian as
1518 > \[
1519 > H = \frac{{p^2 }}{{2m}} + W(x) + \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N
1520 > {\left\{ {\frac{{p_\alpha ^2 }}{{2m_\alpha  }} + \frac{1}{2}m_\alpha
1521 > w_\alpha ^2 \left( {x_\alpha   - \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{m_\alpha
1522 > w_\alpha ^2 }}x} \right)^2 } \right\}}.
1523 > \]
1524 > Since the first two terms of the new Hamiltonian depend only on the
1525 > system coordinates, we can get the equations of motion for
1526 > Generalized Langevin Dynamics by Hamilton's equations,
1527 > \begin{equation}
1528 > m\ddot x =  - \frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}} -
1529 > \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {g_\alpha  \left( {x_\alpha   -
1530 > \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{m_\alpha  w_\alpha ^2 }}x} \right)},
1531 > \label{introEquation:coorMotionGLE}
1532 > \end{equation}
1533 > and
1534 > \begin{equation}
1535 > m\ddot x_\alpha   =  - m_\alpha  w_\alpha ^2 \left( {x_\alpha   -
1536 > \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{m_\alpha  w_\alpha ^2 }}x} \right).
1537 > \label{introEquation:bathMotionGLE}
1538 > \end{equation}
1539 > In order to derive an equation for $x$, the dynamics of the bath
1540 > variables $x_\alpha$ must be solved exactly first. As an integral
1541 > transform which is particularly useful in solving linear ordinary
1542 > differential equations,the Laplace transform is the appropriate tool
1543 > to solve this problem. The basic idea is to transform the difficult
1544 > differential equations into simple algebra problems which can be
1545 > solved easily. Then, by applying the inverse Laplace transform, also
1546 > known as the Bromwich integral, we can retrieve the solutions of the
1547 > original problems. Let $f(t)$ be a function defined on $ [0,\infty )
1548 > $. The Laplace transform of f(t) is a new function defined as
1549 > \[
1550 > L(f(t)) \equiv F(p) = \int_0^\infty  {f(t)e^{ - pt} dt}
1551 > \]
1552 > where  $p$ is real and  $L$ is called the Laplace Transform
1553 > Operator. Below are some important properties of Laplace transform
1554 > \begin{eqnarray*}
1555 > L(x + y)  & = & L(x) + L(y) \\
1556 > L(ax)     & = & aL(x) \\
1557 > L(\dot x) & = & pL(x) - px(0) \\
1558 > L(\ddot x)& = & p^2 L(x) - px(0) - \dot x(0) \\
1559 > L\left( {\int_0^t {g(t - \tau )h(\tau )d\tau } } \right)& = & G(p)H(p) \\
1560 > \end{eqnarray*}
1561 > Applying the Laplace transform to the bath coordinates, we obtain
1562 > \begin{eqnarray*}
1563 > p^2 L(x_\alpha  ) - px_\alpha  (0) - \dot x_\alpha  (0) & = & - \omega _\alpha ^2 L(x_\alpha  ) + \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{\omega _\alpha  }}L(x) \\
1564 > L(x_\alpha  ) & = & \frac{{\frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{\omega _\alpha  }}L(x) + px_\alpha  (0) + \dot x_\alpha  (0)}}{{p^2  + \omega _\alpha ^2 }} \\
1565 > \end{eqnarray*}
1566 > By the same way, the system coordinates become
1567 > \begin{eqnarray*}
1568 > mL(\ddot x) & = &
1569 >  - \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{ { - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2 }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }}\frac{p}{{p^2  + \omega _\alpha ^2 }}pL(x) - \frac{p}{{p^2  + \omega _\alpha ^2 }}g_\alpha  x_\alpha  (0) - \frac{1}{{p^2  + \omega _\alpha ^2 }}g_\alpha  \dot x_\alpha  (0)} \right\}}  \\
1570 >  & & - \frac{1}{p}\frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}}
1571 > \end{eqnarray*}
1572 > With the help of some relatively important inverse Laplace
1573 > transformations:
1574 > \[
1575 > \begin{array}{c}
1576 > L(\cos at) = \frac{p}{{p^2  + a^2 }} \\
1577 > L(\sin at) = \frac{a}{{p^2  + a^2 }} \\
1578 > L(1) = \frac{1}{p} \\
1579 > \end{array}
1580 > \]
1581 > we obtain
1582 > \begin{eqnarray*}
1583 > m\ddot x & =  & - \frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}} -
1584 > \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{ {\left( { - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2
1585 > }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }}} \right)\int_0^t {\cos (\omega
1586 > _\alpha  t)\dot x(t - \tau )d\tau } } \right\}}  \\
1587 > & & + \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{ {\left[ {g_\alpha
1588 > x_\alpha (0) - \frac{{g_\alpha  }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha  }}}
1589 > \right]\cos (\omega _\alpha  t) + \frac{{g_\alpha  \dot x_\alpha
1590 > (0)}}{{\omega _\alpha  }}\sin (\omega _\alpha  t)} \right\}}
1591 > \end{eqnarray*}
1592 > \begin{eqnarray*}
1593 > m\ddot x & = & - \frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}} - \int_0^t
1594 > {\sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left( { - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2
1595 > }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }}} \right)\cos (\omega _\alpha
1596 > t)\dot x(t - \tau )d} \tau }  \\
1597 > & & + \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left\{ {\left[ {g_\alpha
1598 > x_\alpha (0) - \frac{{g_\alpha }}{{m_\alpha \omega _\alpha  }}}
1599 > \right]\cos (\omega _\alpha  t) + \frac{{g_\alpha  \dot x_\alpha
1600 > (0)}}{{\omega _\alpha  }}\sin (\omega _\alpha  t)} \right\}}
1601 > \end{eqnarray*}
1602 > Introducing a \emph{dynamic friction kernel}
1603 > \begin{equation}
1604 > \xi (t) = \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left( { - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2
1605 > }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }}} \right)\cos (\omega _\alpha  t)}
1606 > \label{introEquation:dynamicFrictionKernelDefinition}
1607 > \end{equation}
1608 > and \emph{a random force}
1609 > \begin{equation}
1610 > R(t) = \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {\left( {g_\alpha  x_\alpha  (0)
1611 > - \frac{{g_\alpha ^2 }}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }}x(0)}
1612 > \right)\cos (\omega _\alpha  t)}  + \frac{{\dot x_\alpha
1613 > (0)}}{{\omega _\alpha  }}\sin (\omega _\alpha  t),
1614 > \label{introEquation:randomForceDefinition}
1615 > \end{equation}
1616 > the equation of motion can be rewritten as
1617 > \begin{equation}
1618 > m\ddot x =  - \frac{{\partial W}}{{\partial x}} - \int_0^t {\xi
1619 > (t)\dot x(t - \tau )d\tau }  + R(t)
1620 > \label{introEuqation:GeneralizedLangevinDynamics}
1621 > \end{equation}
1622 > which is known as the \emph{generalized Langevin equation}.
1623 >
1624 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:randomForceDynamicFrictionKernel}\textbf{Random Force and Dynamic Friction Kernel}}
1625 >
1626 > One may notice that $R(t)$ depends only on initial conditions, which
1627 > implies it is completely deterministic within the context of a
1628 > harmonic bath. However, it is easy to verify that $R(t)$ is totally
1629 > uncorrelated to $x$ and $\dot x$,
1630 > \[
1631 > \begin{array}{l}
1632 > \left\langle {x(t)R(t)} \right\rangle  = 0, \\
1633 > \left\langle {\dot x(t)R(t)} \right\rangle  = 0. \\
1634 > \end{array}
1635 > \]
1636 > This property is what we expect from a truly random process. As long
1637 > as the model chosen for $R(t)$ was a gaussian distribution in
1638 > general, the stochastic nature of the GLE still remains.
1639 >
1640 > %dynamic friction kernel
1641 > The convolution integral
1642 > \[
1643 > \int_0^t {\xi (t)\dot x(t - \tau )d\tau }
1644 > \]
1645 > depends on the entire history of the evolution of $x$, which implies
1646 > that the bath retains memory of previous motions. In other words,
1647 > the bath requires a finite time to respond to change in the motion
1648 > of the system. For a sluggish bath which responds slowly to changes
1649 > in the system coordinate, we may regard $\xi(t)$ as a constant
1650 > $\xi(t) = \Xi_0$. Hence, the convolution integral becomes
1651 > \[
1652 > \int_0^t {\xi (t)\dot x(t - \tau )d\tau }  = \xi _0 (x(t) - x(0))
1653 > \]
1654 > and Eq.~\ref{introEuqation:GeneralizedLangevinDynamics} becomes
1655 > \[
1656 > m\ddot x =  - \frac{\partial }{{\partial x}}\left( {W(x) +
1657 > \frac{1}{2}\xi _0 (x - x_0 )^2 } \right) + R(t),
1658 > \]
1659 > which can be used to describe the effect of dynamic caging in
1660 > viscous solvents. The other extreme is the bath that responds
1661 > infinitely quickly to motions in the system. Thus, $\xi (t)$ can be
1662 > taken as a $delta$ function in time:
1663 > \[
1664 > \xi (t) = 2\xi _0 \delta (t)
1665 > \]
1666 > Hence, the convolution integral becomes
1667 > \[
1668 > \int_0^t {\xi (t)\dot x(t - \tau )d\tau }  = 2\xi _0 \int_0^t
1669 > {\delta (t)\dot x(t - \tau )d\tau }  = \xi _0 \dot x(t),
1670 > \]
1671 > and Eq.~\ref{introEuqation:GeneralizedLangevinDynamics} becomes
1672 > \begin{equation}
1673 > m\ddot x =  - \frac{{\partial W(x)}}{{\partial x}} - \xi _0 \dot
1674 > x(t) + R(t) \label{introEquation:LangevinEquation}
1675 > \end{equation}
1676 > which is known as the Langevin equation. The static friction
1677 > coefficient $\xi _0$ can either be calculated from spectral density
1678 > or be determined by Stokes' law for regular shaped particles. A
1679 > briefly review on calculating friction tensor for arbitrary shaped
1680 > particles is given in Sec.~\ref{introSection:frictionTensor}.
1681 >
1682 > \subsubsection{\label{introSection:secondFluctuationDissipation}\textbf{The Second Fluctuation Dissipation Theorem}}
1683 >
1684 > Defining a new set of coordinates,
1685 > \[
1686 > q_\alpha  (t) = x_\alpha  (t) - \frac{1}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha
1687 > ^2 }}x(0)
1688 > \],
1689 > we can rewrite $R(T)$ as
1690 > \[
1691 > R(t) = \sum\limits_{\alpha  = 1}^N {g_\alpha  q_\alpha  (t)}.
1692 > \]
1693 > And since the $q$ coordinates are harmonic oscillators,
1694 > \begin{eqnarray*}
1695 > \left\langle {q_\alpha ^2 } \right\rangle  & = & \frac{{kT}}{{m_\alpha  \omega _\alpha ^2 }} \\
1696 > \left\langle {q_\alpha  (t)q_\alpha  (0)} \right\rangle & = & \left\langle {q_\alpha ^2 (0)} \right\rangle \cos (\omega _\alpha  t) \\
1697 > \left\langle {q_\alpha  (t)q_\beta  (0)} \right\rangle & = &\delta _{\alpha \beta } \left\langle {q_\alpha  (t)q_\alpha  (0)} \right\rangle  \\
1698 > \left\langle {R(t)R(0)} \right\rangle & = & \sum\limits_\alpha  {\sum\limits_\beta  {g_\alpha  g_\beta  \left\langle {q_\alpha  (t)q_\beta  (0)} \right\rangle } }  \\
1699 >  & = &\sum\limits_\alpha  {g_\alpha ^2 \left\langle {q_\alpha ^2 (0)} \right\rangle \cos (\omega _\alpha  t)}  \\
1700 >  & = &kT\xi (t) \\
1701 > \end{eqnarray*}
1702 > Thus, we recover the \emph{second fluctuation dissipation theorem}
1703 > \begin{equation}
1704 > \xi (t) = \left\langle {R(t)R(0)} \right\rangle
1705 > \label{introEquation:secondFluctuationDissipation}.
1706 > \end{equation}
1707 > In effect, it acts as a constraint on the possible ways in which one
1708 > can model the random force and friction kernel.

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines