Force Propagation Method computations

The scalar ( rations (multiplications, additions) required to compute A and A using the Force Propagation Method are shown in Table 4.6. These scalar operations are given for ap AT degree-of-freedom manipulator with simple Involute and/or prismatic joints. Note that 1)1, K, and L)), may all be computed off-line, and that the initial condition, (Ag) = 0, allows some simplification in the first iteration of the Forward Recursion. The computational complexity of the complete algorithm is 0(N), an improvement over the previous two algorithms. The efficient coordinate tiansfcMmations described in Chapter 3 are utilized in every case. 

The efficient computation of fl and A was discussed in detail in Chapt 4. The most efficient method known for the computation of both fl and A for iV < 21 is the Unit Force Method (Method II), which is O(AT ) for an A/ degree-of-freedom manipulator with revolute and/or prismatic joints. For N > 21, the 0(N) Force Propagation Method (Method III) is the most efficient. The use of these two methods will be discussed further in Section 5.1. 

The two tables differ only in the algorithm used to compute the inverse operational space inertia matrix, A and the coefficient fl. In Chapter 4, the efficient computation of these two quantities was discussed in some detail. It was detomined that the Unit Force Method (Method II) is the most efficient algorithm for these two matrices together for N < 21. The Force Propagation Method (Method ni) is the best solution for and fl for AT > 21. The scalar opmtions required for Method II are used in Table 5.1, while those required for Method III are used in Table 5.2. 

Brandi, Johanni, and Otter [3] computes the articulated-body inertia of each link in the chain, starting at the tip and moving back to the base. This same recursion is the first recursion in the Force Propagation Method for computing A. That is, there is an overlap of computations between the solution for the q)en-chain acceleration terms, tjopen and Xopen. and the calculation of the inverse ( rational space inertia matrix, A for this case. This fact was taken into account when the operations were tabulated. The ( rations listed for SI and A in Table 5.2 include only the second recursion for A and the additional opoations needed for SI. The recursion which computes the articulated-body inertias is included in the computatimis for open and x<,pe . 

An important advance in making explicit polarizable force fields computationally feasible for MD simulation was the development of the extended Lagrangian methods. This extended dynamics approach was first proposed by Sprik and Klein [91], in the sipirit of the work of Car and Parrinello for ab initio MD dynamics [168], A similar extended system was proposed by van Belle et al. for inducible point dipoles [90, 169], In this approach each dipole is treated as a dynamical variable in the MD simulation and given a mass, Mm, and velocity, p.. The dipoles thus have a kinetic energy, JT (A)2/2, and are propagated using the equations of motion just like the atomic coordinates [90, 91, 170, 171]. The equation of motion for the dipoles is... 

In order to overcome the limitations of currently available empirical force field param-eterizations, we performed Car-Parrinello (CP) Molecular Dynamic simulations [36]. In the framework of DFT, the Car-Parrinello method is well recognized as a powerful tool to investigate the dynamical behaviour of chemical systems. This method is based on an extended Lagrangian MD scheme, where the potential energy surface is evaluated at the DFT level and both the electronic and nuclear degrees of freedom are propagated as dynamical variables. Moreover, the implementation of such MD scheme with localized basis sets for expanding the electronic wavefunctions has provided the chance to perform effective and reliable simulations of liquid systems with more accurate hybrid density functionals and nonperiodic boundary conditions [37]. Here we present the results of the CPMD/QM/PCM approach for the three nitroxide derivatives sketched above details on computational parameters can be found in specific papers [13]. 

Integral to Car-Parrinello methods is the use of computational quantum mechanics to determine the state of a number of electrons in the presence of any conhguration of atomic nuclei. Determining the electronic state of the system quantum mechanically can be contrasted with using empirically derived potentials, such as Lennard-Jones or Morse potentials, used in classical methods. Once the electronic state has been computed, all properties of the system can be found. For molecular dynamics simulations, the most important properties are the absolute energy of the system and the forces on the individual atomic nuclei. Once these forces are computed, the nuclei can be propagated using classical equations of motion. 

To avoid using a predefined form for the interaction potential in molecular dynamics simulations, the quantum mechanical state of the many-electron system can be determined for a given nuclear configuration. From this quantum mechanical state, all properties of the system can be determined, in particular, the total electronic energy and the force on each of the nuclei. The quantum mechanically derived forces can then be used in place of the classically derived forces to propagate the atomic nuclei. This section describes the most widely used quantum mechanical method for computing these forces used in Car-Parrinello simulations. 

---