Hi Daniel, I agree with Ed that cycling through 2-3-4-5 different, but very similar solutions is an issue with this protocol. You can manually check in the logs with the chi2 value... The cycling should be quite evident as in this case we encountered recently for the sphere diffusion tensor:
i 23706.631648749521 1 462.59288287282465 2 466.46983971466807 3 466.46983971466801 4 466.4698397146683 5 466.46983983218593 6 466.46983971466784 7 466.46983971466773 cycle_I -> pseudo-CONVERGENCE sphere 8 466.46983971466801 as_3 cycle_I 9 466.46983982041428 cycle_I 10 466.46983971466864 cycle_I 11 466.46983971466778 cycle_I 12 466.46983971466773 as_7 cycle_II 13 466.46983971466801 as_3_8 cycle_II 14 466.46983982041428 as_9 cycle_II 15 466.46983971466864 as_10 cycle_II 16 466.46983971466778 as_11 cycle_II 17 466.46983971466773 as_7_12 cycle_III 18 466.46983971466801 as_3_8_13 cycle_III In this example, we chose the first repetitive part as the converged iteration (i.e. the first run in the first cycle). ... If this can be of any help, I suggest you have a look at the supplementary material of a paper we recently published in Biophysical Journal: Fisette, Morin, Savard, Lagüe & Gagné (2010) TEM-1 Backbone Dynamics — Insights from Combined Molecular Dynamics and Nuclear Magnetic Resonance. Biophysical Journal, 98: 637–645. Table S3 on page 21 shows the details of different runs of this protocol with different slightly different protein structures... As you will see, the number of iterations for the ellipsoid model was between 4 and 12 for all runs, except for a run not converged after >30 iterations... hence, the number of iterations is very variable... Good luck ! Séb :) On 10-05-05 5:03 AM, Edward d'Auvergne wrote: > Hi, > > For the ellipsoid model, my experience is that ~15 rounds of > optimisation are required. I can't reinforce enough how complex the > model-free combined optimisation and model selection problem actually > is (all explained in d'Auvergne E. J., Gooley P. R. (2007). Set theory > formulation of the model-free problem and the diffusion seeded > model-free paradigm. Mol. Biosyst., 3(7), 483-494. > http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/b702202f)! This can take up to 2 weeks > depending on how fast your computer is (at 2.4 GHz, I would expect 2 > weeks). Note that later iterations are much faster than the start. I > haven't tested the convergence of the global model with simplex > optimisation, so I have no idea how long this will take and if > convergence can always be reached. One issue that can occur is a 3 to > 4 iteration cycle around the universal solution (combined optimisation > minimum and model selection minimum, see the ref). This you can > manually check in the results files to see if any 2 are identical. If > so, you can stop the calculation. Any of the positions in the cycle > should be ok, as the models and values should be very similar for all > members. I really should add this check to the script! I hope this > helps, > > Regards, > > Edward > > > > 2010/5/5 Daniel Pérez<[email protected]>: > >> Hi everyone, >> >> I've been running a full_analysis script with relaxation data at two fields >> (600 and 900MHz). The calculations with models I to IV run successfully. >> However, the ellipsoid model does not converge even after 7 rounds and more >> than one week of calculation time. >> >> I checked the mailing list and found one similar situation that happened to >> Sebastien (October 24, 2007. Vol.17 issue 8 ... Extremely long optimization >> times). I followed the suggestion by Edward in order to change the >> minimization protocol from "newton" to "simplex". The result is that after >> two weeks and 27 rounds the model ellipsoid still does not converge, and >> with each next round the minimization becomes slower and slower. >> >> The protein is an homodimer of 36KDa. For the model free analysis I'm using >> the pdb structure of the monomer (18KDa), and I might have wrong assigned >> resonances. >> >> I'm running relax 1.3.4 on 2 cores Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU, 6600 @ 2.4GHz, >> 4M cache, and 4G ram. >> >> Do you have any idea?. I'll appreciate any suggestion to follow with the >> analysis. >> >> Thanks >> >> Daniel >> >> Dr. Daniel Pérez >> Institut für Molekularbiologie und Biophysik >> Schafmattstrasse 20 >> ETH-Hönggerberg, HPK G 5 >> CH-8093 Zürich >> Phone: +41 44 633 25 37 >> E-mail: [email protected] >> _______________________________________________ >> relax (http://nmr-relax.com) >> >> This is the relax-users 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-users >> >> > _______________________________________________ > relax (http://nmr-relax.com) > > This is the relax-users 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-users > -- Sébastien Morin PhD Student S. Gagné NMR Laboratory Université Laval& PROTEO Québec, Canada _______________________________________________ relax (http://nmr-relax.com) This is the relax-users 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-users
