-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 24
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Clarification of water box simulation setup #132
Comments
Are you seeing some unexpected behavior? Your code looks ok at first glance. |
You might look at OpenMM-ML. It provides a much easier way to set up the system. The calls to |
Thank you for the responses. I will check out the OpenMM-ML package. @RaulPPelaez, yes, I am observing odd behavior in the simulation. The system temperature fluctates around the setpoint of 300 K. However, I observe that the waters do not diffuse at all. The first video below shows the entire system of water. The second video shows the same simulation but where I focus on a few water molecules. The molecules appear to translate nearly in unison. I am unsure if this behavior is expected for this potential or if there is an issue with how the simulation is set up. A paper on arxiv reports using the ANI-1ccx potential to simulate a box of water and I am using this study as my reference. ani1ccx_water_box.movani1ccx_few_waters.mov |
The water molecules are tightly packed together and linked by a network of hydrogen bonds. On short time scales, they can't diffuse independently. Each molecule is boxed in by its neighbors. On longer time scales, you should see more diffusion. |
Sorry, I should have provided more details regarding the ANI1-ccx simulation. The simulation was run for nearly two ns, and the visualization I showed is from the last ns of the simulation. The trajectory shown is an output frequency of 1 picosecond. I observe this kind of motion throughout the trajectory. While I understand that the network of hydrogen bonds in a tightly packed box can restrain diffusion, I observe significant mobility in MM water models for the same simulation timescale (two ns). The video below tracks a few waters from the last ns of a two ns simulation of SPCE water (where the frame write out frequency is 1 ps -- which is comparable to the previous video). Also, even with the limited diffusion, is it expected that the water molecules should translate in 'unison'? I do not observe this behavior in the MM water models I have simulated (TIP3P, SPCE, and TIP4P05). For the MM simulations, I am using the same script as shown above, with the removal of the sections about the neural network potential. The timestep is 2 fs, and the write out frequency is 1 ps. If it would be helpful, I can provide my trajectories. The behavior I observe contrasts what is reported in the reference study, which states that the model produces diffusion coefficients and radial distributions comparable to experiments and AIMD. (The simulations listed there have 5 ps of equilibration and 10 ps of production. However, they use the ASE program for molecular dynamics). Since I observe this behavior throughout the simulation in OpenMM using ANI-1ccx, and this differs from the results reported using ASE, could this be an issue of how the potential is being applied? spce_few_waters.mov |
Yes, if you don't include a CMMotionRemover in your System. The thermostat applies independent random forces to every atom. They add up to a random total force acting on the center of mass. There's nothing to prevent the center of mass from moving; the whole system is translationally invariant. So it drifts with time. Most simulations include a CMMotionRemover to prevent it. Once you do that, it should be clearer what's happening with the individual molecules, whether they diffuse as expected. |
I have modified the test simulation of alanine dipeptide for a box of TIP3P water using the ANI1ccx model. I would like to clarify if my simulation script is correct. One concern I have is if the periodic boundary conditions are being taken into account correctly. Any clarifications or suggestions would be helpful. Thank you!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: