I sent this around to the locals. They are thrilled that this is being worked on, but want to know why it isn't possible to do this:
S -N -CG-H1 1 0.02 0.0 3. 1.2 2.0 ***G06 - MT
versus:
S -N -CG-H1 1 0.02 0.0 3. ***G06 - MT
S -N -CG-H1 1.2 2.0
They think, perhaps erroneously, that the first method is "backwards compatible because any lines after 5th column are ignored." Is that not true? Are there other complications? They prefer having just the one line for simplicity's sake.
:-) Lachele
--
B. Lachele Foley, PhD '92,'02
Assistant Research Scientist
Complex Carbohydrate Research Center, UGA
706-542-0263
lfoley.ccrc.uga.edu
----- Original Message -----
From: Ross Walker
[mailto:ross.rosswalker.co.uk]
To: 'AMBER Developers Mailing List'
[mailto:amber-developers.ambermd.org]
Sent: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 09:43:22
-0500
Subject: [AMBER-Developers] SCEE and SCNB removed
> Hi All,
>
> Following up on what Dave suggested at the AMBER meeting I have removed SCNB
> and SCEE from the namelist. I have checked this change into the tree and I
> believe updated all the test cases to match. It is possible that I missed
> some though so please let me know if you see any problems.
>
> As the code stands right now it will look in the prmtop file for the
> following sections:
>
> %FLAG SCEE_SCALE_FACTOR
> %FORMAT(5E16.8)
> 1.20000000E+00 1.30000000E+00 1.00000000E+00 1.70000000E+00
> 1.20000000E+00
> 1.20000000E+00 1.30000000E+00
> %FLAG SCNB_SCALE_FACTOR
> %FORMAT(5E16.8)
> 2.00000000E+00 2.10000000E+00 1.00000000E+00 1.00000000E+00
> 2.10000000E+00
> 2.30000000E+00 2.30000000E+00
>
> These should have NDIHEDRALS types entries. If it finds these sections it
> will use these for the 1-4 scaling. So for Glycam for example these would be
> 1.0 for all entries here. For glycam mixed with ff99SB all glycam dihedral
> types would be 1.0, all ff99SB dihedral types would be 1.2 and 2.0
> respectively and all mixed glycam ff99SB dihedral types would be 1.2 and
> 2.0.
>
> If the code does not find these sections in the prmtop it defaults to 1.2
> and 2.0 for scee and scnb. This means that right now if you want to run
> glycam or the original weiner etc al force fields then you either need to
> modify the code to change the defaults or make sure these entries are in
> your prmtop. Thus we should probably update x,y,zleap to write these
> sections based on entires in the prmtop. Volunteers? I know gleap (and I
> assume sleap) can already do this although there is not any documentation on
> how to turn this on.
>
> I propose we update the parmxx.dat file as follows:
>
> O2-S -N -H 1 -0.10 0.0 6. ***G06 - MT
> O2-S -N -CG 1 0.11 0.0 -3. ***G06 - MT
> 1 0.00 0.0 -2.
> 1 0.00 0.0 1.
> S -N -CG-H1 1 0.02 0.0 3. ***G06 - MT
>
> becomes:
> O2-S -N -H 1 -0.10 0.0 6. ***G06 - MT
> O2-S -N -CG 1 0.11 0.0 -3. ***G06 - MT
> 1 0.00 0.0 -2.
> 1 0.00 0.0 1.
> S -N -CG-H1 1 0.02 0.0 3. ***G06 - MT
>
> O2-S -N -H 1.2 2.0
> O2-S -N -CG 1.2 2.0
> S -N -CG-H1 1.2 2.0
>
> A frcmod file would then be:
>
> DIHE
> O2-S -N -H 1 -0.10 0.0 6. ***G06 - MT
> O2-S -N -CG 1 0.11 0.0 -3. ***G06 - MT
> 1 0.00 0.0 -2.
> 1 0.00 0.0 1.
> S -N -CG-H1 1 0.02 0.0 3. ***G06 - MT
>
> 14NONBOND
> O2-S -N -H 1.2 2.0
> O2-S -N -CG 1.2 2.0
> S -N -CG-H1 1.2 2.0
>
> The idea here being that this SCEE/SCNB entry is NOT mandatory meaning it
> remains backwards compatible. If it is not found then the default of 1.2 /
> 2.0 is simply used. If we modify leap to always write the entries in the
> prmtop file then we could simply have a
>
> set default SCEE 1.2
>
> option in leap, with the default being 1.2. This would allow pure GLYCAM /
> Weiner et al sims to be run by just setting these defaults to 1.0 in when
> building the prmtop in leap. Then any dihedral terms explicitly specifying
> SCEE and SCNB values found in parmxx.dat or frcmod would override this
> default.
>
> The issue right now is how to modify the various leaps to include the code
> for reading these extra values, and also writing the extra prmtop sections.
> Do we have anyone 'nominated' to maintain such things in x,t,s,gleap? Can we
> coordinate this change? I can try to do it myself but it might take a while
> for me to work out how to do it.
>
> Comments? Suggestions for doing this better? Leap gurus who think they could
> implement this easily?
>
> All the best
> Ross
>
> /\
> \/
> |\oss Walker
>
> | Assistant Research Professor |
> | San Diego Supercomputer Center |
> | Tel: +1 858 822 0854 | EMail:- ross.rosswalker.co.uk |
> | http://www.rosswalker.co.uk | http://www.wmd-lab.org/ |
>
> 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-Developers mailing list
> AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
>
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Mon Feb 08 2010 - 13:00:04 PST