Classical Semi-Empirical Force Fields Che210d the Classical Picture

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Classical Semi-Empirical Force Fields Che210d the Classical Picture Classical semi-empirical force fields ChE210D Today's lecture: approximate descriptions of interatomic interactions suitable for descriptions of many organic, inorganic, and other non-reacting systems. The classical picture The classical approximation The extensive computational demands of electronic structure calculations mean that their application to even modest-sized molecular systems is quite limited. Fortunately, to good approximation, we don’t need to solve the Schrodinger equation for many systems to accurate- ly reproduce their properties. Instead, we can use a classical description, which ignores the motions of the electrons and describes the time-evolution of the nuclear positions alone. A classical approach uses a force field or classical potential energy function that approximates the quantum ground-state potential energy surface due to electronic structure and internuclear interactions, as a function of the positions of the nuclei. Classical descriptions work very well under the following conditions: • the Born-Oppenheimer approximation is valid • the electronic structure is not of interest • the temperature is modest (not too low) • there is no bond breaking or forming • electrons are highly localized (metals and pi-bonded systems are delocalized) Basic features In the classical approximation, we describe a system by the positions and momenta of all of the atomic nuclei: 푁 퐫 = (푥1, 푦1, 푧1, 푥2, … , 푦푁, 푧푁) 푁 퐩 = (푝푥,1, 푝푦,1, 푝푧,1, 푝푥,2, … , 푝푦,푁, 푝푧,푁) Even though technically we deal with nuclei, we can think of the fundamental particle as an atom. Unlike quantum uncertainty, each atom has a definite position 퐫 and momentum 퐩. © M. S. Shell 2019 1/24 last modified 9/29/2019 Alternatively, we could consider the velocity 퐯 instead of the momentum, since the two simply differ by a constant mass factor. We will actually use the momentum more often, since there are several reasons why it is a more natural in statistical mechanics. A microstate is just one “configuration” of the system. In a classical system, one microstate is characterized by a list of the 3푁 positions 퐫N and 3푁 momenta 퐩푁, for a total of 6푁 pieces of 푁 푁 information. For a microstate 푚 we might use the notation (퐩푚, 퐫푚) to indicate specific values of these variables. For any microstate, we can calculate the total, potential, and kinetic energies. The potential energy function depends on the positions 푈(퐫푁) and the kinetic energy function depends on the momenta 퐾(퐩푁). The Hamiltonian of a classical system is the function that gives the energy of a microstate: 푁 푁 푁 푁 퐻(퐩 , 퐫 ) = 퐾(퐩 ) + 푈(퐫 ) The kinetic energy term simply follows | |2 푁 퐩푖 퐾(퐩 ) = ∑ 2푚푖 푖 Interactions between atoms are described by a potential energy function that depends on the positions but not the momenta of all of the atoms, 푈(퐫1, 퐫2, … ). Fundamentally, the potential energy function approximates ground state energy that would be obtained by solving the electronic structure using Schrodinger’s equation, for fixed nuclear positions. The time evolution of the system is deterministic and described by Newton’s equations: 2 푑 퐫푖 푚 = 퐅 for all atoms 푖 푖 푑푡2 푖 Or alternatively, 푑퐩푖 푑푈 = − (퐫1, 퐫2, … ) 푑푡 푑퐫푖 Here, the LHS gives the time rate of change of momentum of atom 푖 and the RHS gives the force on atom 푖 which, by definition, is the derivative of the potential energy function with respect to atom 푖’s position. The total energy is constant during a system’s time evolution according to Newton’s laws. This is a statement of the conservation of energy. It is readily shown: © M. S. Shell 2019 2/24 last modified 9/29/2019 2 푑퐻 푑푈 푑퐫푖 푑 퐩푖 = ∑ + ∑ ( ) 푑푡 푑퐫푖 푑푡 푑푡 2푚푖 푑푈 푑퐫푖 퐩푖 푑퐩푖 = ∑ ( + ) combining the sums 푑퐫푖 푑푡 푚푖 푑푡 푑푈 푑퐫푖 푑퐫푖 푑퐩푖 푑퐫푖 = ∑ ( + ) using the fact that 퐩푖 = 푚푖 푑퐫푖 푑푡 푑푡 푑푡 푑푡 푑퐫푖 푑푈 푑퐩푖 = ∑ ( + ) 푑푡 푑퐫푖 푑푡 푑퐫푖 푑퐩푖 푑푈 = ∑ × 0 = 0 using Newton's law = − 푑푡 푑푡 푑퐫푖 The atomic force field The most important aspect of the classical description is the potential energy function 푈(퐫푁). This function takes in a set of positions of all of the atoms and returns an energy due to the interatomic interactions. This energy approximates that which one would obtain by solving the Schrodinger equation for all of the electrons in the multi-atom system, for given fixed positions of the nuclei. The approximation stems from examining the various modes by which atoms can interact according to the Schrodinger equation, and patching simple, often first-order theoreti- cal expressions for these together. 푈 typically has two main components, energies due to bonded and nonbonded interactions. These arise as different interpretations of the solution of the Schrodinger equation for the electron clouds; it turns out that our notion of bonded interactions naturally manifest as solutions to the wavefunctions when atoms approach at close range. Bonded interactions Bond stretching An accurate description of bond stretching that well-describes quantum-mechanical solutions is the empirical Morse potential: © M. S. Shell 2019 3/24 last modified 9/29/2019 2 −푎(푑−푑0) 푢(푑) = 퐷푒[1 − 푒 ] where 푑 is the length of the bond,푎 a constant, 푑0 the equilibrium bond length, and 퐷푒 the well depth minimum. However, this form is rarely used. It requires three parameters per bond and is somewhat expensive to compute in simulation due to the exponential term. Since the energy scales of bond stretching are so high, bonds rarely deviate significantly from the equilibrium bond length. Thus we can use a second-order Taylor expansion around the energy minimum: 2 푢(푑) = 푎(푑 − 푑0) where 푎 is a different constant from above. Bond angle bending This potential accounts for deviations from the preferred hybridization geometry (e.g., sp3). Again a common form is a second-order Taylor expansion about the energy minimum: 2 푢(휃) = 푏(휃 − 휃0) where 휃 is the bond angle between three atoms and 푏 and 휃0 are constants. Bond torsions/dihedrals fig © M. S. Shell 2019 4/24 last modified 9/29/2019 These interactions occur among four atoms and account for energies of rotations along bonds. Unlike bonding and angle terms, these degrees of freedom are “soft” in that torsional energies are often not so high as to only allow small deviations from an equilibrium structure. Generic torsional interactions can be approximated by a cosine expansion, 푁 푛 푢(휔) = ∑ 푐푛 cos(휔) 푛=0 where 휔 is torsional angle, 푛 is a summation index, 푐푛 are summation coefficients, and 푁 is the number of terms in the expansion. In practice, an alternative but ultimately equivalent expres- sion is often used: 푁 푢(휔) = ∑ 푐푛[1 + cos(푛휔 − 훾)] 푛=0 where the 푐푛 are different from above and the parameter 훾 is an additional offset parameter. This form has the advantage of converging faster for a given number of terms in the expansion. In practice, generally only one or two terms is used. Nonbonded interactions The nonbonded interactions apply to any atoms that are not closely bonded (generally with a bond order greater than 3 or 4), either within the same molecule or between two different molecules. These interactions are described using a pairwise decomposition of the energy. Formally, we can decompose the potential energy function into interactions involving single atoms, pairs of atoms, triples of atoms, and so on and so forth: 푁 푁 푁 푁 푁 푁 푁 푈(퐫 ) = ∑ 푢1(퐫푖) + ∑ ∑ 푢2(퐫푖, 퐫푗) + ∑ ∑ ∑ 푢3(퐫푖, 퐫푗, 퐫푘) + ⋯ 푖=1 푖=1 푗=푖+1 푖=1 푗=푖+1 푘=푗+1 Typically, by symmetry, the two- and three-body terms do not depend on the absolute posi- tions of the molecules but on the relative positions: 푁 푁 푁 푁 푁 푁 푁 푈(퐫 ) = ∑ 푢1(퐫푖) + ∑ ∑ 푢2(푟푖푗) + ∑ ∑ ∑ 푢3(푟푖푗, 푟푖푘, 푟푗푘) + ⋯ 푖=1 푖=1 푗=푖+1 푖=1 푗=푖+1 푘=푗+1 We see that multi-body effects are first included at the level of the pair potential. We would like to truncate this expansion beyond that point for the following reason: the two- and three- body interactions require a loop over atom pairs and triplets, respectively, and thus their © M. S. Shell 2019 5/24 last modified 9/29/2019 relative computational expense goes as 푁2 and 푁3. The cubic scaling might make our simula- tions prohibitive for modest system sizes. By truncating the higher order interactions, we typically neglect important effects as these make nonnegligible contributions to the total energy. Instead, we approximate the higher- order energies by renormalizing the pair interactions. At this point, we have an effective pair potential rather than the one which would result from this systematic expansion: 푁 푁 푁 푁 푈(퐫 ) ≈ ∑ 푢1(퐫푖) + ∑ ∑ 푢eff(푟푖푗) 푖=1 푖=1 푗=푖+1 Electrostatics In the classical approximation, atoms can have a net charge, which may be a partial or formal charge. Here, the charges are typically determined so as to reproduce the same electrostatic potential that would be given by the true electronic structure and electron density distribution. Atoms with partial charges interact through Coulomb’s law, 푞푖푞푗 푢(푟푖푗) = 4휋휖0푟푖푗 for the two atoms 푖 and 푗 separated by distance 푟푖푗. The partial charges are given by 푞푖 and 푞푗, and 휖0 is the free space permittivity. Note that electrostatic interactions are long-ranged and thus require special treatment, which we will discuss in more detail in Simulations of Bulk Phases. van der Waals attractions Correlations between the instantaneous electron densities surrounding two atoms gives rise to an attractive energy.
Recommended publications
  • Measurement of the Speed of Gravity
    Measurement of the Speed of Gravity Yin Zhu Agriculture Department of Hubei Province, Wuhan, China Abstract From the Liénard-Wiechert potential in both the gravitational field and the electromagnetic field, it is shown that the speed of propagation of the gravitational field (waves) can be tested by comparing the measured speed of gravitational force with the measured speed of Coulomb force. PACS: 04.20.Cv; 04.30.Nk; 04.80.Cc Fomalont and Kopeikin [1] in 2002 claimed that to 20% accuracy they confirmed that the speed of gravity is equal to the speed of light in vacuum. Their work was immediately contradicted by Will [2] and other several physicists. [3-7] Fomalont and Kopeikin [1] accepted that their measurement is not sufficiently accurate to detect terms of order , which can experimentally distinguish Kopeikin interpretation from Will interpretation. Fomalont et al [8] reported their measurements in 2009 and claimed that these measurements are more accurate than the 2002 VLBA experiment [1], but did not point out whether the terms of order have been detected. Within the post-Newtonian framework, several metric theories have studied the radiation and propagation of gravitational waves. [9] For example, in the Rosen bi-metric theory, [10] the difference between the speed of gravity and the speed of light could be tested by comparing the arrival times of a gravitational wave and an electromagnetic wave from the same event: a supernova. Hulse and Taylor [11] showed the indirect evidence for gravitational radiation. However, the gravitational waves themselves have not yet been detected directly. [12] In electrodynamics the speed of electromagnetic waves appears in Maxwell equations as c = √휇0휀0, no such constant appears in any theory of gravity.
    [Show full text]
  • Classical Mechanics
    Classical Mechanics Hyoungsoon Choi Spring, 2014 Contents 1 Introduction4 1.1 Kinematics and Kinetics . .5 1.2 Kinematics: Watching Wallace and Gromit ............6 1.3 Inertia and Inertial Frame . .8 2 Newton's Laws of Motion 10 2.1 The First Law: The Law of Inertia . 10 2.2 The Second Law: The Equation of Motion . 11 2.3 The Third Law: The Law of Action and Reaction . 12 3 Laws of Conservation 14 3.1 Conservation of Momentum . 14 3.2 Conservation of Angular Momentum . 15 3.3 Conservation of Energy . 17 3.3.1 Kinetic energy . 17 3.3.2 Potential energy . 18 3.3.3 Mechanical energy conservation . 19 4 Solving Equation of Motions 20 4.1 Force-Free Motion . 21 4.2 Constant Force Motion . 22 4.2.1 Constant force motion in one dimension . 22 4.2.2 Constant force motion in two dimensions . 23 4.3 Varying Force Motion . 25 4.3.1 Drag force . 25 4.3.2 Harmonic oscillator . 29 5 Lagrangian Mechanics 30 5.1 Configuration Space . 30 5.2 Lagrangian Equations of Motion . 32 5.3 Generalized Coordinates . 34 5.4 Lagrangian Mechanics . 36 5.5 D'Alembert's Principle . 37 5.6 Conjugate Variables . 39 1 CONTENTS 2 6 Hamiltonian Mechanics 40 6.1 Legendre Transformation: From Lagrangian to Hamiltonian . 40 6.2 Hamilton's Equations . 41 6.3 Configuration Space and Phase Space . 43 6.4 Hamiltonian and Energy . 45 7 Central Force Motion 47 7.1 Conservation Laws in Central Force Field . 47 7.2 The Path Equation .
    [Show full text]
  • Secondary Structure Propensities in Peptide Folding Simulations: a Systematic Comparison of Molecular Mechanics Interaction Schemes
    Biophysical Journal Volume 97 July 2009 599–608 599 Secondary Structure Propensities in Peptide Folding Simulations: A Systematic Comparison of Molecular Mechanics Interaction Schemes Dirk Matthes and Bert L. de Groot* Department of Theoretical and Computational Biophysics, Computational Biomolecular Dynamics Group, Max-Planck-Institute for Biophysical Chemistry, Go¨ttingen, Germany ABSTRACT We present a systematic study directed toward the secondary structure propensity and sampling behavior in peptide folding simulations with eight different molecular dynamics force-field variants in explicit solvent. We report on the combi- national result of force field, water model, and electrostatic interaction schemes and compare to available experimental charac- terization of five studied model peptides in terms of reproduced structure and dynamics. The total simulation time exceeded 18 ms and included simulations that started from both folded and extended conformations. Despite remaining sampling issues, a number of distinct trends in the folding behavior of the peptides emerged. Pronounced differences in the propensity of finding prominent secondary structure motifs in the different applied force fields suggest that problems point in particular to the balance of the relative stabilities of helical and extended conformations. INTRODUCTION Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations are routinely utilized to that study, simulations of relatively short lengths were per- study the folding dynamics of peptides and small proteins as formed and the natively folded state was used as starting well as biomolecular aggregation. The critical constituents of point, possibly biasing the results (13). such molecular mechanics studies are the validity of the under- For folding simulations, such a systematic test has not lyingphysical models together with theassumptionsofclassical been carried out so far, although with growing computer dynamics and a sufficient sampling of the conformational power several approaches toward the in silico folding space.
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Dynamics Simulations in Drug Discovery and Pharmaceutical Development
    processes Review Molecular Dynamics Simulations in Drug Discovery and Pharmaceutical Development Outi M. H. Salo-Ahen 1,2,* , Ida Alanko 1,2, Rajendra Bhadane 1,2 , Alexandre M. J. J. Bonvin 3,* , Rodrigo Vargas Honorato 3, Shakhawath Hossain 4 , André H. Juffer 5 , Aleksei Kabedev 4, Maija Lahtela-Kakkonen 6, Anders Støttrup Larsen 7, Eveline Lescrinier 8 , Parthiban Marimuthu 1,2 , Muhammad Usman Mirza 8 , Ghulam Mustafa 9, Ariane Nunes-Alves 10,11,* , Tatu Pantsar 6,12, Atefeh Saadabadi 1,2 , Kalaimathy Singaravelu 13 and Michiel Vanmeert 8 1 Pharmaceutical Sciences Laboratory (Pharmacy), Åbo Akademi University, Tykistökatu 6 A, Biocity, FI-20520 Turku, Finland; ida.alanko@abo.fi (I.A.); rajendra.bhadane@abo.fi (R.B.); parthiban.marimuthu@abo.fi (P.M.); atefeh.saadabadi@abo.fi (A.S.) 2 Structural Bioinformatics Laboratory (Biochemistry), Åbo Akademi University, Tykistökatu 6 A, Biocity, FI-20520 Turku, Finland 3 Faculty of Science-Chemistry, Bijvoet Center for Biomolecular Research, Utrecht University, 3584 CH Utrecht, The Netherlands; [email protected] 4 Swedish Drug Delivery Forum (SDDF), Department of Pharmacy, Uppsala Biomedical Center, Uppsala University, 751 23 Uppsala, Sweden; [email protected] (S.H.); [email protected] (A.K.) 5 Biocenter Oulu & Faculty of Biochemistry and Molecular Medicine, University of Oulu, Aapistie 7 A, FI-90014 Oulu, Finland; andre.juffer@oulu.fi 6 School of Pharmacy, University of Eastern Finland, FI-70210 Kuopio, Finland; maija.lahtela-kakkonen@uef.fi (M.L.-K.); tatu.pantsar@uef.fi
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to GROMOS
    CSCPB - Introduction to GROMOS Information: Prof. Dr. W.F. van Gunsteren Laboratory of Physical Chemistry, ETH-Z¨urich, 8092 Z¨urich, Switzerland Tel: +41-44-6325501 Fax: +41-44-6321039 e-mail: [email protected] Note: This MD tutorial is still under development. Please report any errors, incon- sistencies, obscurities or suggestions for improvements to [email protected]. Purpose: This molecular dynamics (MD) tutorial serves a number of objectives. These are to obtain experience with: • computer simulation in general • executing and understanding GROMOS • interpreting the results of computer simulations Version: SVN revision December 5, 2007 W.F.v.G., Z.G., J.D., A-P.K., C.C., N.S. 1 Required knowledge: Some knowledge about the following is required: • Computer programming languages: ability to read simple code (C++). • Computer operating system language of the machine on which the tutorial will be carried out: UNIX. Good books on MD are (Frenkel & Smit, 2002) and (Allen & Tildesley, 1987). 2 Contents 1 INTRODUCTION 4 1.1 The Lennard-Jones interaction . 4 1.2 Electrostatic interaction . 5 1.3 Periodic boundary conditions . 5 1.4 Newton’s equations of motion . 6 1.5 The leap-frog integration scheme . 7 1.6 Coupling to a temperature bath . 8 1.7 Pressure and the virial . 9 1.8 Center of mass motion . 9 1.9 Gaussian or Maxwellian distributions . 10 1.10 The radial distribution function g(r).................. 10 1.11 Units . 11 2 INSTALLATION OF GROMOS 12 2.1 System Requirements . 12 2.2 Getting and Installing GROMOSXX . 13 2.3 Getting and Installing GROMOS++ .
    [Show full text]
  • Development of an Advanced Force Field for Water Using Variational Energy Decomposition Analysis Arxiv:1905.07816V3 [Physics.Ch
    Development of an Advanced Force Field for Water using Variational Energy Decomposition Analysis Akshaya K. Das,y Lars Urban,y Itai Leven,y Matthias Loipersberger,y Abdulrahman Aldossary,y Martin Head-Gordon,y and Teresa Head-Gordon∗,z y Pitzer Center for Theoretical Chemistry, Department of Chemistry, University of California, Berkeley CA 94720 z Pitzer Center for Theoretical Chemistry, Departments of Chemistry, Bioengineering, Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, University of California, Berkeley CA 94720 E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Given the piecewise approach to modeling intermolecular interactions for force fields, they can be difficult to parameterize since they are fit to data like total en- ergies that only indirectly connect to their separable functional forms. Furthermore, by neglecting certain types of molecular interactions such as charge penetration and charge transfer, most classical force fields must rely on, but do not always demon- arXiv:1905.07816v3 [physics.chem-ph] 27 Jul 2019 strate, how cancellation of errors occurs among the remaining molecular interactions accounted for such as exchange repulsion, electrostatics, and polarization. In this work we present the first generation of the (many-body) MB-UCB force field that explicitly accounts for the decomposed molecular interactions commensurate with a variational energy decomposition analysis, including charge transfer, with force field design choices 1 that reduce the computational expense of the MB-UCB potential while remaining accu- rate. We optimize parameters using only single water molecule and water cluster data up through pentamers, with no fitting to condensed phase data, and we demonstrate that high accuracy is maintained when the force field is subsequently validated against conformational energies of larger water cluster data sets, radial distribution functions of the liquid phase, and the temperature dependence of thermodynamic and transport water properties.
    [Show full text]
  • International Centre for Theoretical Physics
    REFi IC/90/116 INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR THEORETICAL PHYSICS FIXED SCALE TRANSFORMATION FOR ISING AND POTTS CLUSTERS A. Erzan and L. Pietronero INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION 1990 MIRAMARE- TRIESTE IC/90/116 International Atomic Energy Agency and United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR THEORETICAL PHYSICS FIXED SCALE TRANSFORMATION FOR ISING AND POTTS CLUSTERS A. Erzan International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Trieste, Italy and L. Pietronero Dipartimento di Fisica, Universita di Roma, Piazzale Aldo Moro, 00185 Roma, Italy. ABSTRACT The fractal dimension of Ising and Potts clusters are determined via the Fixed Scale Trans- formation approach, which exploits both the self-similarity and the dynamical invariance of these systems at criticality. The results are easily extended to droplets. A discussion of inter-relations be- tween the present approach and renormalization group methods as well as Glauber—type dynamics is provided. MIRAMARE - TRIESTE May 1990 To be submitted for publication. T 1. INTRODUCTION The Fixed Scale Transformation, a novel technique introduced 1)i2) for computing the fractal dimension of Laplacian growth clusters, is applied here to the equilibrium problem of Ising clusters at criticality, in two dimensions. The method yields veiy good quantitative agreement with the known exact results. The same method has also recendy been applied to the problem of percolation clusters 3* and to invasion percolation 4), also with very good results. The fractal dimension D of the Ising clusters, i.e., the connected clusters of sites with identical spins, has been a controversial issue for a long time ^ (see extensive references in Refs.5 and 6).
    [Show full text]
  • Qwikmd-Tutorial.Pdf
    University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology Theoretical and Computational Biophysics Group Computational Biophysics Workshop QwikMD - Easy Molecular Dynamics with NAMD and VMD Tutorial by Rafael C. Bernardi, Till Rudack, Joao V. Ribeiro, Angela Barragan, Muyun Lihan, Rezvan Shahoei and Yi Zhang July 12 2017 QwikMD Developers: Joao V. Ribeiro Rafael C. Bernardi Till Rudack A current version of this tutorial is available at http://www.ks.uiuc.edu/Training/Tutorials/ CONTENTS 2 Contents 1 Introduction 3 1.1 NAMD . 3 1.2 QwikMD . 4 2 Required programs 4 2.1 For Linux/Mac Users: . 5 2.2 For Windows Users: . 5 3 Getting Started 5 4 Installing the Required Programs 6 4.1 VMD . 6 4.2 QwikMD . 6 4.3 NAMD . 6 5 Running my First Molecular Dynamics Simulation 7 5.1 Ubiquitin in implicit solvent . 8 5.1.1 Preparing structures and starting simulations . 9 5.1.2 Analyzing during a Live Simulation . 11 5.2 Ubiquitin in a Water Box . 12 5.2.1 Starting a New Simulation . 12 5.2.2 Creating a Salt Solution . 13 5.3 Running your Simulation outside of QwikMD . 14 6 Tackling common scientific problems 15 6.1 Cancer mutation in Ras . 16 6.2 HIV protease . 19 6.3 Proton transport through a membrane by bactheriorhodopsin . 25 7 Steered Molecular Dynamics 31 7.1 Biomolecular interactions during protein unfolding . 31 7.1.1 Preparing a SMD system . 32 7.1.2 Analyzing during a Live Simulation . 33 7.2 Setting-up steered molecular dynamics to study protein complex interaction .
    [Show full text]
  • FORCE FIELDS for PROTEIN SIMULATIONS by JAY W. PONDER
    FORCE FIELDS FOR PROTEIN SIMULATIONS By JAY W. PONDER* AND DAVIDA. CASEt *Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics, Washington University School of Medicine, 51. Louis, Missouri 63110, and tDepartment of Molecular Biology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, California 92037 I. Introduction. ...... .... ... .. ... .... .. .. ........ .. .... .... ........ ........ ..... .... 27 II. Protein Force Fields, 1980 to the Present.............................................. 30 A. The Am.ber Force Fields.............................................................. 30 B. The CHARMM Force Fields ..., ......... 35 C. The OPLS Force Fields............................................................... 38 D. Other Protein Force Fields ....... 39 E. Comparisons Am.ong Protein Force Fields ,... 41 III. Beyond Fixed Atomic Point-Charge Electrostatics.................................... 45 A. Limitations of Fixed Atomic Point-Charges ........ 46 B. Flexible Models for Static Charge Distributions.................................. 48 C. Including Environmental Effects via Polarization................................ 50 D. Consistent Treatment of Electrostatics............................................. 52 E. Current Status of Polarizable Force Fields........................................ 57 IV. Modeling the Solvent Environment .... 62 A. Explicit Water Models ....... 62 B. Continuum Solvent Models.......................................................... 64 C. Molecular Dynamics Simulations with the Generalized Born Model........
    [Show full text]
  • Force Fields for MD Simulations
    Force Fields for MD simulations • Topology/parameter files • Where do the numbers an MD code uses come from? • How to make topology files for ligands, cofactors, special amino acids, … • How to obtain/develop missing parameters. • QM and QM/MM force fields/potential energy descriptions used for molecular simulations. The Potential Energy Function Ubond = oscillations about the equilibrium bond length Uangle = oscillations of 3 atoms about an equilibrium bond angle Udihedral = torsional rotation of 4 atoms about a central bond Unonbond = non-bonded energy terms (electrostatics and Lenard-Jones) Energy Terms Described in the CHARMm Force Field Bond Angle Dihedral Improper Classical Molecular Dynamics r(t +!t) = r(t) + v(t)!t v(t +!t) = v(t) + a(t)!t a(t) = F(t)/ m d F = ! U (r) dr Classical Molecular Dynamics 12 6 &, R ) , R ) # U (r) = . $* min,ij ' - 2* min,ij ' ! 1 qiq j ij * ' * ' U (r) = $ rij rij ! %+ ( + ( " 4!"0 rij Coulomb interaction van der Waals interaction Classical Molecular Dynamics Classical Molecular Dynamics Bond definitions, atom types, atom names, parameters, …. What is a Force Field? In molecular dynamics a molecule is described as a series of charged points (atoms) linked by springs (bonds). To describe the time evolution of bond lengths, bond angles and torsions, also the non-bonding van der Waals and elecrostatic interactions between atoms, one uses a force field. The force field is a collection of equations and associated constants designed to reproduce molecular geometry and selected properties of tested structures. Energy Functions Ubond = oscillations about the equilibrium bond length Uangle = oscillations of 3 atoms about an equilibrium bond angle Udihedral = torsional rotation of 4 atoms about a central bond Unonbond = non-bonded energy terms (electrostatics and Lenard-Jones) Parameter optimization of the CHARMM Force Field Based on the protocol established by Alexander D.
    [Show full text]
  • FORCE FIELDS and CRYSTAL STRUCTURE PREDICTION Contents
    FORCE FIELDS AND CRYSTAL STRUCTURE PREDICTION Bouke P. van Eijck ([email protected]) Utrecht University (Retired) Department of Crystal and Structural Chemistry Padualaan 8, 3584 CH Utrecht, The Netherlands Originally written in 2003 Update blind tests 2017 Contents 1 Introduction 2 2 Lattice Energy 2 2.1 Polarcrystals .............................. 4 2.2 ConvergenceAcceleration . 5 2.3 EnergyMinimization .......................... 6 3 Temperature effects 8 3.1 LatticeVibrations............................ 8 4 Prediction of Crystal Structures 9 4.1 Stage1:generationofpossiblestructures . .... 9 4.2 Stage2:selectionoftherightstructure(s) . ..... 11 4.3 Blindtests................................ 14 4.4 Beyondempiricalforcefields. 15 4.5 Conclusions............................... 17 4.6 Update2017............................... 17 1 1 Introduction Everybody who looks at a crystal structure marvels how Nature finds a way to pack complex molecules into space-filling patterns. The question arises: can we understand such packings without doing experiments? This is a great challenge to theoretical chemistry. Most work in this direction uses the concept of a force field. This is just the po- tential energy of a collection of atoms as a function of their coordinates. In principle, this energy can be calculated by quantumchemical methods for a free molecule; even for an entire crystal computations are beginning to be feasible. But for nearly all work a parameterized functional form for the energy is necessary. An ab initio force field is derived from the abovementioned calculations on small model systems, which can hopefully be generalized to other related substances. This is a relatively new devel- opment, and most force fields are empirical: they have been developed to reproduce observed properties as well as possible. There exists a number of more or less time- honored force fields: MM3, CHARMM, AMBER, GROMOS, OPLS, DREIDING..
    [Show full text]
  • Investigating the Dynamics of Aggregation in Chromophores Used in Organic Photovoltaics with the Help of Simulations
    Investigating the Dynamics of Aggregation in Chromophores used in Organic Photovoltaics with the Help of Simulations Von der Universität Bayreuth zur Erlangung des Grades eines Doktors der Naturwissenschaften (Dr. rer. nat.) genehmigte Abhandlung von Axel Bourdick geboren in Frankfurt am Main 1. Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Stephan Gekle 2. Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Stephan Kümmel Tag der Einreichung: 20.12.2019 Tag des Kolloquiums: 28.04.2020 When one experiences truth, the madness of finding fault with others disappears. - S. N. Goenka Contents 1 Summary1 2 Introduction6 2.1 Motivation of this dissertation . .6 2.2 Morphology . .8 2.3 Methological details . 12 2.3.1 Molecular dynamics simulations . 12 2.3.2 Free energy and umbrella sampling . 13 2.3.3 Metadynamics . 16 2.3.4 Density functional theory . 17 2.3.5 Model building . 18 3 Overview of the publications 20 3.1 Investigated systems . 20 3.2 Summary and scientific context . 22 3.3 Summary of individual publications . 26 3.3.1 Elucidating Aggregation Pathways in the Donor-Acceptor Type Molecules p-DTS(FBTTh2)2 and p-SIDT(FBTTh2)2 . 26 3.3.2 What is the role of planarity and torsional freedom for ag- gregation in a π-conjugated donor-acceptor model oligomer? 30 3.3.3 Directing the Aggregation of Native Polythiophene during in Situ Polymerization . 33 4 References 37 5 Publications 50 5.1 Elucidating Aggregation Pathways in the Donor-Acceptor Type Molecules p-DTS(FBTTh2)2 and p-SIDT(FBTTh2)2 ......... 52 5.2 What is the role of planarity and torsional freedom for aggregation in a π-conjugated donor-acceptor model oligomer? .
    [Show full text]