Hi Daniel,
Should I then consider the inverse of each value?
5562 5562
1 1/0.80680
2 1/1.09819
3 1/1.67464
4 1/2.01560
5 1/2.39907
Then the contribution of eigenvector
1 is 1/0.806 / [1/0.806 + 1/1.09 + ...+ 1/2.399]
4 is 1/2.015 / [1/0.806 + 1/1.09 + ...+ 1/2.399]
This would make sense. Is this accurate?
P
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Daniel Roe <daniel.r.roe.gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Pavan G <pavanamber.gmail.com> wrote:
> > But this would mean that contribution of 2nd eigenvector is more than 1st
> > eigenvector which seems incorrect since
> > 1>2>3>4>5.
>
> When you analyze mass-weighted covariance matrices (quasi-harmonic
> analysis) the eigenvalues are converted into units of cm^-1, so the
> smallest # in your case does correspond to the largest eigenvalue.
>
> -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 Thu Jul 25 2013 - 16:00:02 PDT
