Any comment on this "shift" issue? 
I tried to find the relevant script in share/votca/scripts/inverse but it 
seems that all interpolation is done by `csg_reupdate' app, and I didn't 
have time up to now to look into the code.

Thanks! / Andrey

On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 11:59:37 AM UTC+1, Andrey Brukhno wrote:
>
> ...
> As a matter of fact, the problem appears to be not a poor interpolation 
> but a systematic shift in the X axis (by the size of the grid bin in the 
> original data, i. e. param.init files) - see the corrected graph where I 
> simply shifted all the interpolation curves by dx=0.02.
>
> So I conclude that something is fishy about the x column in the pot.cur 
> files.
>
> Andrey
>
> On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 11:45:27 AM UTC+1, Andrey Brukhno wrote:
>>
>> Hi Christoph & Sikandar,
>>
>> Thank you both for your replies!
>>
>> Per your suggestions, I have compared the potentials generated (i.e. 
>> B-spline interpolated) based on the initial guesses provided as 
>> CGi-CGj.param.init files with the original data (i.e. the contents of those 
>> param.init files). I found systematic discrepancies (see the attached 
>> graph, where only 3 potentials shown)! - No wonder I am getting into 
>> trouble after a new simulation with the potentials being that much off, 
>> especially at shorter distances.
>>
>> Is it normal to have such large differences with the interpolated data? 
>> I would think that there must be a way to improve on the interpolation by 
>> varying something in the input - ?
>> Is it where the LJ repulsive core would help? (Although I think that 
>> would be an ad hoc workaround for the poor interpolation issue.)
>>
>> It seems I still need your advice here, based on your practical 
>> experience.
>>
>> Andrey
>>
>> On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 7:39:45 AM UTC+1, sikandar wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Andrey,
>>>
>>> Below are some of the things you can try to address this issue.
>>>
>>> 1. Make sure the potentials generated from your initial parameters are 
>>> physically consistent
>>> 2. Increase number of timesteps in CG simulation
>>> 3. Decrease the scaling parameter
>>> 4. If your CG system has charges, then you may need to add a LJ type 
>>> potential to your CBSPL CG potential after every CG update to ensure that 
>>> the CG potential is repulsive enough at short distances and does not allow 
>>> overlap of oppositely charged sites. You can enable this option by 
>>> specifying post_update block for every CG potential pair as
>>> <non-bonded>
>>> ...
>>> <post_update>lj</post_update>
>>> <post_update_options>
>>> <lj>
>>> <c6> LJ C6 Value </c6>
>>> <c12> LJ C12 Value </c12>
>>> </lj>
>>> </post_update_options>
>>> ...
>>> </non-bonded>
>>>
>>> I hope this helps.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Sikandar
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 6:13 PM Christoph Junghans <[email protected]> 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 18:15 'Andrey Brukhno' via votca <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> I managed to run the RE iteration for a system with 10 non-bonded 
>>>>> potentials (types).. well, the first iteration anyway, where it 
>>>>> terminated 
>>>>> after about an hour of running csg_reupdate with the following error:
>>>>>
>>>>> *Hessian NOT a positive definite! *
>>>>> This can be a result of poor initial guess or ill-suited CG potential 
>>>>> settings or poor CG sampling.
>>>>>
>>>>> My understanding is, sometimes this might happen, but this was my 
>>>>> second trial where I virtually doubled (44 -> 88) the number of knots and 
>>>>> (in both cases) I use potentials derived from an earlier IBI iteration. 
>>>>>
>>>>> I would really appreciate clues, hints or general advice as to how to 
>>>>> alleviate the issue.
>>>>>
>>>> Sikandar will know more, but most likely you will need to throw away 
>>>> some frames at the beginning of the trajectory and run the iterations for 
>>>> a 
>>>> bit longer!
>>>>
>>>> Christoph 
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>> Andrey
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> 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 https://groups.google.com/group/votca.
>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> 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 https://groups.google.com/group/votca.
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>
>>>

-- 
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 https://groups.google.com/group/votca.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to