Re: [AMBER] TI electrostatic free energy

From: Franz Waibl <Franz.Waibl.uibk.ac.at>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 13:57:37 +0100

Dear Dr. Case, dear Amber community,

As you expected, the dV/dlambda plot is approximately a straight line
(see attached plot). It's value at lambda=0.5 is 129, which would be
consistent with the resulting free energy assuming a straight dV/dlambda.

However, the molecule does not seem to be charged. Parmed reports:
"Total charge (e-): 0.0000". The pmemd log-file states: "Total charge
of   0.00000199 removed from      24 atoms", and, later:

      Sum of charges for TI region  1 =   0.00000199
      Skip neutralizing charges...


      Sum of charges for TI region  2 =   0.00000000
      Skip neutralizing charges...

I tried setting gti_output=1 and gti_cpu_output=0. An example output is:

  +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
  Detailed TI info at lambda=  0.50000000000000000
Region                    H           W       dH/dl       dW/dl
TI 1 vDW             -17.92901     0.50000     0.00000    -1.00000
TI 2 vDW             -17.92901     0.50000     0.00000     1.00000
lambda = 0.500 : vDW      H=     -17.9290 dU/dL: L=    0.0000 NL=   
0.0000 Tot=    0.00000
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
TI 1 Bond              3.60649     0.50000     0.00000    -1.00000
TI 2 Bond              3.60649     0.50000     0.00000     1.00000
lambda = 0.500 : Bond     H=       3.6065 dU/dL: L=    0.0000 NL=   
0.0000 Tot=    0.00000
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
TI 1 Angle            10.47196     0.50000     0.00000    -1.00000
TI 2 Angle            10.47196     0.50000     0.00000     1.00000
lambda = 0.500 : Angle    H=      10.4720 dU/dL: L=    0.0000 NL=   
0.0000 Tot=    0.00000
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
TI 1 Torsion           3.97381     0.50000     0.00000    -1.00000
TI 2 Torsion           3.97381     0.50000     0.00000     1.00000
lambda = 0.500 : Torsion  H=       3.9738 dU/dL: L=    0.0000 NL=   
0.0000 Tot=    0.00000
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
TI 1 EE14-CC        -167.78045     0.50000     0.00000    -1.00000
TI 2 EE14-CC           0.00000     0.50000     0.00000     1.00000
lambda = 0.500 : EE14-CC  H=     -83.8902 dU/dL: L=  167.7805 NL=   
0.0000 Tot=  167.78045
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
TI 1 VDW14             6.67059     0.50000     0.00000    -1.00000
TI 2 VDW14             6.67059     0.50000     0.00000     1.00000
lambda = 0.500 : VDW14    H=       6.6706 dU/dL: L=    0.0000 NL=   
0.0000 Tot=    0.00000
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
TI 1 Elec-Rec         70.62218     0.50000     0.00000    -1.00000
TI 2 Elec-Rec         70.71291     0.50000     0.00000     1.00000
lambda = 0.500 : Elec-Rec H=      70.6675 dU/dL: L=    0.0907 NL=   
0.0000 Tot=    0.09072
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
TI 1 Elec-CC         171.47972     0.50000     0.00000    -1.00000
TI 2 Elec-CC           0.00001     0.50000     0.00000     1.00000
lambda = 0.500 : Elec-CC  H=      85.7399 dU/dL: L= -171.4797 NL=   
0.0000 Tot= -171.47971
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
TI 1 Self-CC           0.00000     0.50000     0.00000    -1.00000
TI 2 Self-CC         137.51100     0.50000     0.00000     1.00000
lambda = 0.500 : Self-CC  H=      68.7555 dU/dL: L=  137.5110 NL=   
0.0000 Tot=  137.51100
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
lambda = 0.500 : Total dU/dl:  133.902458  L:  133.90246  NL: 0.00000 
PI:    0.00000
  +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

So it seems the large contributions are Self-CC, Elec-CC and EE14-CC.

Sadly, I am not experienced with TI, so I can't really judge how
"normal" those values are...


Best regards,

Franz Waibl

Am 30.11.2020 um 19:10 schrieb David A Case:
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020, Franz Waibl wrote:
>> I am trying to compute the free energy of hydration of a set of small
>> molecules at different salt concentrations, using TI.
>>
>> The problem is that I am getting very large free energies (e.g, 130
>> kcal/mol for caffeine, favoring lambda=0).
> Is there any chance that your caffeine molecule has a net charge? It
> would also be helpful to plot <dV/dlambda> vs. lambda: it that
> approximately a straight line? Is that value at lambda = 0.5 about 65?
>
> I'm really guessing here, but this looks like results for de-charging an
> ion. (Use the "summary" command in parmed to look for the charge
> model.)
>
> ....dac
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

caffeine-electrostatic-ti.png
(image/png attachment: caffeine-electrostatic-ti.png)

Received on Tue Dec 01 2020 - 05:00:02 PST
Custom Search