2013/7/16  <[email protected]>:
>
>
> 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.
non zero will not be enough, it has to be 1 otherwise your potential
will still accumulated whatever the value, kT*log(P(r_cut), at the
cutoff is.

For me the distributions looks more like a something, which could be
modeled with a non-linear spring type potential (r-> +/-inf P->inf),
where the minimum is a zero.
VOTCA could do that for you if declare the interaction as bonded.
(VOTCA's definition of non-bonded and bonded might not be taken too
strict.)
Also from the modeling point of view, it might make sense to have a
spring between some beads, which cannot go infinitely apart due to
geometry.

Anyhow, these are scientific decisions you have to make yourself.

Christoph

>
> Steven
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:09 PM,  <[email protected]> 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].
>> > 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].
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