W dniu wtorek, 16 lipca 2013 08:48:51 UTC+1 użytkownik Tristan Bereau 
napisał:
>
> That sounds like what I was hinting at: from what I understand, you're 
> simulating a single protein, not a pure liquid of stuff. So your RDF 
> will never go to 1 because there won't be anything at large distances. 
> Is that the case? If so, more iterations and/or better initial guesses 
> won't cut it. 
>

Yes, this is the case. I will aproximate the RDFs so that they go to sth 
which is non zero. Thank you.

Steven 

>
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:09 PM,  <[email protected] <javascript:>> 
> wrote: 
> > Thank you for this. For heterogenous system RDF does not go to 1 but to 
> 0. 
> > In this case I guess I need thousands of iterations... The system input 
> are 
> > 15 potentials which makes it so complicated. 
> > 
> > Steven 
> > 
> > W dniu poniedziałek, 15 lipca 2013 17:44:46 UTC+1 użytkownik Christoph 
> > Junghans napisał: 
> >> 
> >> 2013/7/15  <[email protected]>: 
> >> > Votca is definitely wrong. If you take the example of maximum of my 
> >> > ACI-ACI.dist.tgt the maximum corresponds to 65.555. The potential at 
> >> > this 
> >> > point should be: W = -2.49435*ln(65.55) = -10.433 and in my 
> >> > ACI-ACI.dist.pot 
> >> > the value corresponds to -16.1 - it is a huge difference and that is 
> why 
> >> > my 
> >> > further distributions are so huge.... 
> >> No, Votca is 100% correct, and does what it is supposed to do. 
> >> 
> >> First, have a look at your ACI-ACI.dist.tgt again, this distribution 
> >> doesn't go to one hence the potential doesn't go to 0 for large r. 
> >> And that is mainly the reason why VOTCA cannot handle it, 
> >> ACI-ACI.dist.tgt is not a common rdf! 
> >> You will have to provide an initial guess (pot.in) to make it work. 
> >> (Please also read my email from July 10th again.) 
> >> 
> >> Second, VOTCA does exactly what it is supposed to do. Go into gnuplot 
> and 
> >> run: 
> >> p [0:3][-20:5] "ACI-ACI.dist.tgt" u 1:(-2.49435*log($2)-5.7) w l, 
> >> "ACI-ACI.pot.cur" w l 
> >> Except for some small deviations, which come from the cubic spline 
> >> interpolation, there is no difference in the curves. 
> >> As Victor said before, VOTCA shifts the potential to be zero at the 
> >> cutoff -> -10.433 - 5.7 = -16.1. This shift of 5.7 makes no difference 
> >> for the thermodynamics however. 
> >> 
> >> Third, even pot.new is correct. Run 
> >> $ paste ACI-ACI.dist.new <(sed '/^#/d' ACI-ACI.dist.tgt) <(sed '/^#/d' 
> >> ACI-ACI.pot.cur) > ACI-ACI.temp 
> >> to generate a temp file. 
> >> And go into gnuplot and plot: 
> >> p [0:3][-20:5] "ACI-ACI.temp" u 1:(2.49435*log($2/$5)+$8-16.1) w l, 
> >> "ACI-ACI.pot.new" w l 
> >> There is basically no difference in the curves. 
> >> 
> >> Conclusion: 
> >> - check your distributions again 
> >> - provide pot.in for the interaction, which don't have a "common" rdf 
> >> (meaning which doesn't go to 1) 
> >> 
> >> Christoph 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > W dniu poniedziałek, 15 lipca 2013 12:59:40 UTC+1 użytkownik 
> >> > [email protected] napisał: 
> >> >> 
> >> >> 
> >> >> 
> >> >> W dniu poniedziałek, 15 lipca 2013 12:42:37 UTC+1 użytkownik Victor 
> >> >> Rühle 
> >> >> napisał: 
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> Dear Steven, 
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> provided the same kBT was used, I can think of two issues which 
> might 
> >> >>> lead to these differences 
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> 1) votca can shift the potential, but the shape should match. That 
> can 
> >> >>> in 
> >> >>> particular happen if you cut the rdf in a region where there are 
> still 
> >> >>> modulations. 
> >> >>> 2) What type of potential are you lookin at? For bonds and angles, 
> >> >>> there 
> >> >>> is indeed a normalization necessary, see 
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1521-4044(199802)49:2/3
> <61::AID-APOL61>3.0.CO;2-V 
> >> >> 
> >> >> 
> >> >> Thank you. I am looking at the nonbonded interactions only. The 
> shape 
> >> >> of 
> >> >> the potential matches but the minima is lower than from my 
> calulation. 
> >> >> There 
> >> >> is no normalization for non bonded so this is weird. I cut it at the 
> >> >> begining as there were very small values and Votca was not able to 
> >> >> extrapolate it properly. 
> >> >> 
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> Your second point indeed sounds a bit weired. Could you please post 
> >> >>> these 
> >> >>> few curves to help debugging (i.e. the <name>.pot.cur, 
> <name>.pot.new 
> >> >>> <name>.dist.tgt <name>.dist.new of the iteration 1 folder)? 
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> Victor 
> >> >> 
> >> >> 
> >> >> Please, see attached. 
> >> >> 
> >> >> 
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> 2013/7/15 <[email protected]> 
> >> >>>> 
> >> >>>> Dear Votca Users, 
> >> >>>> 
> >> >>>> I have to issues with IBI: 
> >> >>>> 
> >> >>>> 1) I took one my ditributions and calculated on my own potential 
> W= 
> >> >>>> -kBT 
> >> >>>> ln(RDF) and I got different potential than Votca provide me. For 
> >> >>>> instance 
> >> >>>> lets calculate the potential minimum for the distribution maximum 
> of 
> >> >>>> 162. 
> >> >>>> Pot = -.249435*ln(164) = -12.69. The minimum of Votca potential 
> >> >>>> corresponds 
> >> >>>> to approximately -16 kJ/mol. Where I missed something? is it 
> somehow 
> >> >>>> normalized? 
> >> >>>> 
> >> >>>> 2) After 1st iteration my distribution was much higher than the 
> >> >>>> target 
> >> >>>> one so I guess the potential should decrease but apparently the 
> new 
> >> >>>> potential has deeper minima so the next distribution has a even 
> higer 
> >> >>>> distribution. Could anyone please explain me this? 
> >> >>>> 
> >> >>>> Steven 
> >> >>>> 
> >> >>>> 
> >> >>>> -- 
> >> >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> >> >>>> Groups "votca" group. 
> >> >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, 
> >> >>>> send 
> >> >>>> an email to [email protected]. 
> >> >>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. 
> >> >>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/votca. 
> >> >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. 
> >> >>>> 
> >> >>>> 
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> 
> >> > -- 
> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> >> > Groups 
> >> > "votca" group. 
> >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, 
> send 
> >> > an 
> >> > email to [email protected]. 
> >> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. 
> >> > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/votca. 
> >> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. 
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> -- 
> >> Christoph Junghans 
> >> Web: http://www.compphys.de 
> > 
> > -- 
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> Groups 
> > "votca" group. 
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
> an 
> > email to [email protected] <javascript:>. 
> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]<javascript:>. 
>
> > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/votca. 
> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. 
> > 
> > 
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"votca" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/votca.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to