Hi,

I forgot to mention how I validated that the numeric model code in
relax is functional and finding the correct result.  I would have
liked to compare the results with Flemming Hansen's CATIA program
(http://www.biochem.ucl.ac.uk/hansen/catia/), but this relax export
function is not implemented yet (unlike those for CMPGFit, ShereKhan,
and NESSY).  I therefore compared the results to those of the Carver
and Richards (CR72) analytic model using Flemming Hansen's data from
his 2008 J. Phys. Chem. B paper (http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp074793o).
 For residues 70 and 71, the analytic CR72 model results from the
various programs and the numeric relax results are:


The CR72 model
==============


Residue :70
-----------

Param       relax       NESSY       CPMGFit     ShereKhan
R2 (500)        7.011       7.236       6.263       7.011
R2 (800)        9.465      10.027       6.263       9.465
pA              0.990       0.989       0.978       0.990
dw              5.577       5.373       0.937       5.577
kex          1765.993    1522.059       1.774    1765.988
chi2           18.450       7.701      65.237      18.450


Residue :71
-----------

Param       relax       NESSY       CPMGFit     ShereKhan
R2 (500)        4.978           -       4.983       4.978
pA              0.997           -       0.994       0.997
dw              4.460           -       0.757       4.461
kex          1879.584           -       0.896    1879.618
chi2            1.379           -       1.382       1.379


The numeric models in relax
===========================

Residue :70
-----------

Param     NS 2-site 3D  NS 2-site expanded   NS 2-site star
R2 (500)         6.996               6.996            6.996
R2 (800)         9.453               9.453            9.453
pA               0.990               0.990            0.990
dw               5.645               5.645            5.645
kex           1723.443            1723.443         1723.078
chi2            18.098              18.098           18.098


Residue :71
-----------

Param     NS 2-site 3D  NS 2-site expanded   NS 2-site star
R2 (500)         4.980               4.980            4.980
pA               0.997               0.997            0.997
dw               4.629               4.629            4.629
kex           1805.665            1805.676         1805.110
chi2             1.371               1.371            1.371


This comes from the
test_suite/shared_data/dispersion/Hansen/software_comparison file.
For these residues, you can see that the CR72 and numeric results are
very similar.  It could be hard to argue that they are statistically
different.  But this shows that the code is functioning perfectly.

Regards,

Edward



On 23 July 2013 09:28, Edward d'Auvergne <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The 2-site numeric dispersion models for CPMG data are now fully functional
> within relax!  The following describes how these are implemented in relax
> (to be permanently archived at
> http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.science.nmr.relax.devel).  I hope that you will
> check all of this by running relax and seeing for yourself.  I also have a
> few questions below.  Note that the code is in the relax_disp branch of the
> source code repository and that there is no official release at
> http://www.nmr-relax.com/download.html yet.
>
> I have documented the numeric models now present in relax in Chapter 10 of
> the user manual.  I have compiled the current manual for the branch and
> uploaded it to http://download.gna.org/relax/manual/relax_disp_manual.pdf.
> Please have a look and see what you think.  The text is extremely minimal
> and needs to be expanded.  If you have any suggestions or additional
> material (equations, figures, etc., and in LaTeX preferably), it would be
> happily accepted.  For example equations for the matrices and the
> propagation used.  The aim is to be a complete stand-alone relaxation
> dispersion reference for the users, pointing them to all the relevant
> literature at all possible points.  Cheers!
>
> As a summary, from the relax_disp.select_model user function description,
> the numeric models are:
>
>     'NS 2-site 3D':  The reduced numerical solution for the 2-site
> Bloch-McConnell equations using 3D magnetisation vectors whereby the
> simplification R20A = R20B is assumed.  Its parameters are {R20, ..., pA,
> dw, kex}.
>
>     'NS 2-site 3D full':  The full numerical solution for the 2-site
> Bloch-McConnell equations using 3D magnetisation vectors.  Its parameters
> are {R20A, R20B, ..., pA, dw, kex}.
>
>     'NS 2-site star':  The reduced numerical solution for the 2-site
> Bloch-McConnell equations using complex conjugate matrices whereby the
> simplification R20A = R20B is assumed.  It has the parameters {R20, ..., pA,
> dw, kex}.
>
>     'NS 2-site star full':  The full numerical solution for the 2-site
> Bloch-McConnell equations using complex conjugate matrices with parameters
> {R20A, R20B, ..., pA, dw, kex}.
>
>     'NS 2-site expanded':  The numerical solution for the 2-site
> Bloch-McConnell equations expanded using Maple by Nikolai Skrynnikov.  It
> has the parameters {R20, ..., pA, dw, kex}.
>
> I would be interested to hear if you have suggestions for saner model names.
>
> In the auto-analysis in relax - the blackbox analysis script to make the
> lives of users extremely easy - the *full models are not turned on by
> default.  If curious, you can see auto-analysis script in the file
> auto_analyses/relax_disp.py.  The auto-analysis script is normally hidden
> from the user.  Also, please run the relax GUI with:
>
> $ relax --gui
>
> and start the relaxation dispersion analysis to see how it is implemented.
> Note that the auto-analyses are used for the operation of all GUI analyses.
> Using scripts, the relax user is free to do anything they wish and implement
> any protocol they can imagine (if useful for other users, these can then be
> converted into an auto-analysis).
>
> Part of the auto-analysis that I have implemented is the concept of using
> optimised parameters from a simpler or equivalent model to speed up
> optimisation by avoiding an expensive grid search.  For the 'full' models
> above, I use the parameters of the simpler model and start with R20A = R20B
> = R20.  Then, during optimisation, R20A and R20B diverge.
>
> For the model equivalence, this is a bit different.  I use the optimised
> parameter values from the analytic Carver and Richards model (CR72) as the
> starting parameters for the 'NS 2-site 3D', 'NS 2-site star' and 'NS 2-site
> expanded' models.  This avoids the grid search and really speeds up the
> optimisation by orders of magnitude.  It can be done because the CR72
> results are often very similar to the numeric results.  And even a failed
> CR72 solution is close enough to the minima to be used as a starting point
> for the numeric models.
>
> I have a few other implementation questions, but I'll send these in a
> different message for saner threads in the mailing list archives.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Edward
>
>
> P. S.  Actually, I might take some of this text into the relax manual :)

_______________________________________________
relax (http://www.nmr-relax.com)

This is the relax-devel mailing list
[email protected]

To unsubscribe from this list, get a password
reminder, or change your subscription options,
visit the list information page at
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/relax-devel

Reply via email to