AMBER Archive (2005)Subject: Re: AMBER: TI with electrostatic decoupling at sander
From: David A. Case (case_at_scripps.edu)
Date: Wed Jan 26 2005  23:51:32 CST
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005, yipinl_at_umich.edu wrote:
>
> In the tutorial, a formula:
> [samplerms]*sqrt[correlationtime/lengthofsimulation]
> is used to estimate the expected error in the mean value of DV/DL. My
> understanding is that this is a statistical estimate of the error term. So for
> the correlationtime/lengthofsimulation term, should I calculate it using
> (1+2?)/n
> where n is the number of data points and ? is a correlation length calculated
> from the autocrrelation coefficients: ? = sum(1k/n)?, according to the paper
> by Dr. Pearlman at J. Comp. Chem. 1994, 105?
The mail encoding I got made it difficult to read your question. Estimating
the number of "independent samples" as simulationlength/correlation time is
qualitative: depending exactly on how you calculate the autocorrelation of the
<dV/dl> values, this value might better be calculated with an extra sqrt(2) or
so. So, you should treat such estimates with care; a better method is
probably to independently redo the simulation multiple times.
>
> For the removing of charge in the vacuum, the tutorial said:
> "Hence, the expected error in the mean is about 0.028 * sqrt[ 0.1/50 ] = 0.001
> kcal/mol. "
> But the RMS fluctuation of DV/DL in the output is 0.0807, not 0.028.
My mistake...I copied the wrong number from the output. I'll update the
tutorial with this change.
...thanks...dave case

The AMBER Mail Reflector
To post, send mail to amber_at_scripps.edu
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amber" to majordomo_at_scripps.edu
