Re: [AMBER] Different Versions of Amber: Comparable results?

From: david condon <dec986.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 16:32:03 -0500

Thank you very much Ross and Jason!

I appreciate your help!

On 1/11/11, Ross Walker <ross.rosswalker.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi Dave
>
>> I have 3 simple questions (tried searching for this already and asked
>> around, no one is absolutely sure about this):
>>
>> 1) Are results from pmemd and sander comparable?
>
> Yes, perfectly comparable.
>
>> 2) Is it acceptable to run a single simulation with different versions
>> of AMBER (e.g. at 200 ns switch from Amber 9 to Amber 11)?
>
> Yes. Although if you go to far back the file formats can change a little.
>
>> 3) Is it acceptable to switch from SANDER to PMEMD in the middle of a
>> simulation? I did this a few days ago, and it looks fine. I just
>> would like to be sure.
>
> Yes.
>
> All the best
> Ross
>
>
> /\
> \/
> |\oss Walker
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> | Assistant Research Professor |
> | San Diego Supercomputer Center |
> | Adjunct Assistant Professor |
> | Dept. of Chemistry and Biochemistry |
> | University of California San Diego |
> | NVIDIA Fellow |
> | http://www.rosswalker.co.uk | http://www.wmd-lab.org/ |
> | Tel: +1 858 822 0854 | EMail:- ross.rosswalker.co.uk |
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Note: Electronic Mail is not secure, has no guarantee of delivery, may not
> be read every day, and should not be used for urgent or sensitive issues.
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AMBER mailing list
> AMBER.ambermd.org
> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
>

_______________________________________________
AMBER mailing list
AMBER.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
Received on Wed Jan 12 2011 - 14:00:02 PST
Custom Search