You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I just found that that atomic charges of part of the molecules are different in gromacs_solvated.tar.gz and gromacs.tar.gz.
Such as the mobley_820789, the atomic charges in gromacs/mobley_820789.top are:
While in gromacs_solvated/mobley_820789.top:
That's quite different. And only the parameters in gromacs/mobley_820789.top can reproduce the result in literature.
Openff-toolkit was used to regenerate the atomic charges of mobley_820789 with gaff-1.8, and the regenerated charges were consistent with the content in gromacs/mobley_820789.top.
How did the charges in gromacs_solvated generated? And was it processed after gaff-1.7?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Wow, yes, these are VERY different. That's quite concerning.
At this point (given how much time has elapsed) i don't have any information on provenance other than what's present in our scripts and paper. I certainly HOPE all of this was generated fully consistently via the scripts, but also the superficial first impression of the files is that this is what one would get if there is some kind of human error in generation protocol (e.g. someone copied the wrong file somewhere), which makes me worried. Do you have a sense of how widespread this problem is?
Well, I did a simple analysis today.
If we compare the non-bond parameters only, there are 452 molecules that contain different parameters between gromacs_solvated.tar.gz and gromacs.tar.gz.
But some of the charge parameters are closer, indicating that they may be generated with different random seeds.
If we enlarge the tolerance of the charges difference to 0.01 e, there are 29 molecules that contains different parameters within these two set.
If you want to fix this problem, I recommend you to regenerate the files in gromacs_solvated.tar.gz as it contains parameters that do not reproduce the calculated solvation free energies.
I just found that that atomic charges of part of the molecules are different in gromacs_solvated.tar.gz and gromacs.tar.gz.
Such as the mobley_820789, the atomic charges in gromacs/mobley_820789.top are:
While in gromacs_solvated/mobley_820789.top:
That's quite different. And only the parameters in gromacs/mobley_820789.top can reproduce the result in literature.
Openff-toolkit was used to regenerate the atomic charges of mobley_820789 with gaff-1.8, and the regenerated charges were consistent with the content in gromacs/mobley_820789.top.
How did the charges in gromacs_solvated generated? And was it processed after gaff-1.7?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: