Comparison of two methods for solving linear equations occurring in molecular dynamics applications

Computer Physics Communications

Volumn 94, Issue 1, 1996, Pages 1-18

  Ovesen, Jens H ^a   Petersen, Henrik G ^a   Perram, John W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Bond length constraints; Molecular dynamics simulation

Indexed keywords

CHEMICAL BONDS; COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONSTRAINT THEORY; DRUG PRODUCTS; LINEAR ALGEBRA; PROTEINS;

BOND LENGTH; BOND VIBRATIONS; BONDED FORCES; CHOLESKY FACTORIZATION; CONJUGATE GRADIENT METHOD; LINEAR EQUATIONS;

MOLECULAR DYNAMICS;

EID: 0030106014     PISSN: 00104655     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/0010-4655(95)00135-2     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. T. Darden, D. York and L. Pedersen, Particle mesh Ewald: An N log(N) method for Ewald sums in large systems, J. Chem. Phys. 98 (1993) 10089-10092.
2. R. Edberg, D.J. Evans and G.P. Morriss, Constrained molecular dynamics: Simulations of liquid alkanes with a new algorithm, J. Chem. Phys. 84 (1986) 6933-6939.
3. K. Esselink, A comparison of algorithms for long-range interactions, Comput. Phys. Commun. 87 (1995) 375-395.
4. G. Fox, M. Johnson, G. Lyzenga, S. Otto, J. Salmon and D. Walker, Solving Problems On Concurrent Processors (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1988).
5. A. George and J.W.-H. Liu, Computer Solution of Large Sparse Positive Definite Systems (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1981).
6. G.H. Golub and C.F. Van Loan, Matrix Solutions, 2nd Ed. (The Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, London, 1989, 1991).
7. L. Greengard, The Rapid Evaluation of Potential Fields in Particle Systems (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1988, 1991).
8. W.F. van Gunsteren and H.J.C. Berendsen, Algorithms for macromolecular dynamics and constraint dynamics, Molec. Phys. 34 (1977) 1311-1327.
9. S.W. de Leeuw and J.W. Perram, Computer simulation of ionic systems: Influence of boundary conditions, Physica A 107 (1981) 179-189.
10. S.W. de Leeuw, J.W. Perram and H.G. Petersen, Hamilton's equations for constrained dynamical systems, J. Stat. Phys. 61 (1990) 1203-1222.
11. S.W. de Leeuw, J.W. Perram and E.R. Smith, Simulation of electrostatic systems in periodic boundary conditions. I. Lattice sums and dielectric constants, Proc. R. Soc. A 373 (1980) 27-56.
12. L.A. Pars, Variation principles in dynamics, Quart. J. Mech. and Applied Math., Vol. VII, Pt. 3 (1954) 339-351.
13. J.W. Perram and H.G. Petersen, Algorithms for computing the dynamical trajectories of flexible bodies, Molec. Phys. 65 (1988) 861-874.
14. 3/2 power of the number of particles, Molec. Phys. 65 (1988) 875-893.
15. H.G. Petersen, Accuracy and efficiency of the particle mesh Ewald method, J. Chem. Phys. (accepted).
16. W.H. Press, S.A. Teukolsky, W.T. Vetterling and B.P. Flannery, Numerical Recipes in C, 2nd Ed. (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1988, 1994).
17. J.-P. Ryckaert, G. Ciccotti and H.J.C. Berendsen, Numerical integration of the cartesian equations of motion of a system with constraints: Molecular dynamics of n-alkanes, J. Comput. Phys. 23 (1977) 327-341.
18. M. Sails, Molecular dynamics simulations of proteins in solution: Artifacts caused by the cutoff approximation, J. Chem. Phys. 101 (1994) 4055-4061.
19. A.H. Sherman, On the efficient solution of sparse systems of linear and nonlinear equations, Rept. No. 46, Dept. of Computer Science, Yale University (1975).
20. J.R. Shewchuk, An introduction to the conjugate gradient method without the agonizing pain, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213; the article can be found in ftp://warp.cs.cmu.edu/quake-papers/painless-conjugate-gradient.ps
21. D. Soelvason, J. Kolafa, H.G. Petersen and J.W. Perram, A rigorous comparison of the Ewald method and the fast multipole method in two dimensions, Comput. Phys. Commun. 87 (1995) 307-318.
22. B. Stroustrup, The C++ Programming Language, 2nd Ed. (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1991, 1994).