Hi Rob, 

thank you, your comments helped a lot. 

From the Refmac5 paper I did not get the fact that d is set to d_current 
after each step. In that case you are right, jelly-body corresponds rather to 
DEN with gamma=1 than to gamma=0. 

And of course, a very important difference is, as you said, the fact that 
jelly-body is applied only to the second derivative.  

However,  I would like to clarify this one point you made:
For gamma=1 the DEN potential can follow anywhere, the entire conformational 
space is accessible and  dij(t+1) depends only on Dij(t) and dij(t).
The update formula is (again, for gamma=1):
 dij(t+1) = (1-kappa)*dij(t) + kappa * Dij(t+1) 

Dij(t) : distance between atom i and j and time t. 
dij_ref : distance between atom i and j in the reference structure.
dij(t)  : equilibrium distance of restraint between atom i and j at time t.

The parameter kappa just defines how quickly dij(t) changes, 
i.e. kappa=1 sets  dij(t+1)= Dij(t+1)  at each time step.

The parameter kappa is usually set to 0.1, which means the restraints 
slowly follow the atomic coordinates.  But, again, the starting (or reference) 
model is completely forgotten and never used after the first iteration. 
This also means that the position of the minima of the target function 
are not changed by the DEN (gamma=1) restraints. It could just take longer 
to get there as the restraints need to be dragged along. 

For gamma<1, the situation is different, there are additional forces toward  
the reference (could be the starting) model, in which case dij(t+1) 
additionally 
depends on dij_ref.   This also changes the position of the minima of the 
target 
function. It is therefore usually useful to run a final minimization without 
restraints to test whether the refinement reached a stable minimum of the 
target function. 

From the user perspective, I think the main difference is that DEN is designed 
to be used in simulated annealing MD refinement,  whereas jelly-body is 
designed 
to be used in minimization (and cannot be used for MD refinement as there are 
no second derivatives).

Cheers,
  Gunnar

Reply via email to