Dear Dr. Roe,
Thank you very much.
Regards,
Chinh
On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 10:51 PM, Daniel Roe <daniel.r.roe.gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 11:00 PM, Chinh Su Tran To
> <chinh.sutranto.gmail.com> wrote:
> > And I got the result as attached. According to the plot, COULD I draw a
> > conclusion that the model at the bottom is more stable than the upper one
> > regardless their values??
>
> I think the only things these plots tell you is that on average the
> top system has a larger radius of gyration than the bottom, and that
> the RoG of the starting conformation for the bottom system was closer
> to its final value than the top system. It could be that both will
> eventually stabilize to different values, or 10 ns from now maybe the
> RoG of the bottom system will suddenly spike. In my opinion there's
> just too little information at this point to say that either model is
> stable. One way to start addressing this would be to start another
> independent simulation for each system, using different initial
> velocities (and ideally different starting coordinates). Then you can
> start to get some idea of the variance in each individual model, which
> will help you when you compare the different models to each other.
>
> -Dan
>
> --
> -------------------------
> Daniel R. Roe, PhD
> Department of Medicinal Chemistry
> University of Utah
> 30 South 2000 East, Room 201
> Salt Lake City, UT 84112-5820
> http://home.chpc.utah.edu/~cheatham/
> (801) 587-9652
> (801) 585-9119 (Fax)
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 Sun Jul 07 2013 - 21:30:02 PDT
