Metropolis sampling

For convenience, let us consider a property dependent only on position coordinates. Expressing die elegantly simple Metropolis idea mathematically, we have 

The Metropolis prescription dictates that we choose points with a Boltzmann-weighted probability. The typical approach is to begin with some reasonable configuration qj. The value of property A is computed as the first element of the sum in Eq. (3.33), and then qi is randomly perturbed to give a new configuration qa. In the constant particle number, constant 

if the energy of point q2 is not higher than that of point qi, the point is always accepted. If the energy of the second point is higher than the first, p is compared to a random number z between 0 and 1, and the move is accepted if p z. Accepting the point means that the value of A is calculated for that point, that value is added to the sum in Eq. (3.33), and the entire process is repeated. If second point is not accepted, then the first point repeats , i.e., the value of A computed for the first point is added to the sum in Eq. (3.33) a second time and a new, random perturbation is attempted. Such a sequence of phase points, where each new point depends only on the immediately preceding point, is called a Markov chain . 

In practice, MC simulations are primarily applied to collections of molecules (e.g., molecular liquids and solutions). The perturbing step involves the choice of a single molecule, which is randomly translated and rotated in a Cartesian reference frame. If the molecule is flexible, its internal geometry is also randomly perturbed, typically in internal coordinates. The ranges on these various perturbations are adjusted such that 20-50% of attempted moves are accepted. Several million individual points are accumulated, as described in more detail in Section 3.6.4. 

Note that in the MC methodology, only die energy of the system is computed at any given point. In MD, by contrast, forces are the fundamental variables. Pangali, Rao, and Berne (1978) have described a sampling scheme where forces are used to choose the direction(s) for molecular perturbations. Such a force-biased MC procedure leads to higher acceptance rates and greater statistical precision, but at tlie cost of increased computational resources. 

Because of the dominance of a certain restricted space of microstates in ordered phases, it is obviously a good idea to primarily concentrate in a simulation on a precise sampling of the microstates that form the macrostate under given external parameters such as, for example, the temperature. The canonical probability distribution functions clearly show that within the certain stable phases, only a limited energetic space of microstates is noticeably populated, whereas the probability densities drop off rapidly in the tails. Thus, an efficient sampling of this state space should yield the relevant information within comparatively short Markov chain Monte Carlo runs. This strategy is called importance sampling. 

The standard importance sampling variant is the Metropolis method [85], where the algorithmic microstate probability p(X) is identified with the canonical microstate probability p(X) at the given temperature T (or = 1 /k T). Thus, the acceptance 

According to Eq. (4.80), a Monte Carlo update from X to X (assuming a(X, X ) = 1) is accepted, if the energy of the new microstate is lower than before, E(X ) E(X). If the chosen update would provoke an increase of energy, E(X ) E(X), the conformational change is accepted only with the probability where AE = E(X ) — E(X). Technically, in the 

Monte Cario and chain growth methods for molecular simulations 

for low temperatures, where lowest-energy states dominate, the widths of the canonical distributions are extremely small and since l/r is very large, energetic uphill updates are strongly suppressed by the Boltzmaim weight 0. That 

Consider a gas at constant density and constant temperature. Suppose we are interested in the internal energy, E, of the gas. In principle we can try to evaluate Eq. (5.8). Instead of doing this by an analytic method, we use a device which supplies us with a sample of Ey-values distributed according to pv as defined in Eq.(5.7). Our estimate for E would then be E, where the bar indicates the average over our sample. In the limit of an infinite sample we have E = (E) = E. But how would such a device look like  

Hentschke, Thermodynamics, Undergraduate Lecture Notes in Physics, 

We consider a simple example. Rather than using an infinite set of Sy-values from which we generate our sample, we just work with four values. They are not called energy—we just call them 1,2, 3, and 4. A possible sample might look like this  

But what is the underlying probability distribution, p , in this example For the moment we decide to invent a distribution, i.e. we require that the even digits, 2 and 4, are twice as probable as the odd ones, 1 and 3.  

A computer algorithm generating a series of digits possessing this distribution is the following  

---

In this context it turned out to be useful to investigate data in terms of the difference between the external and internal temperature of the system [43,44]. The external temperature is the temperature given from outside and used in the Metropolis sampling for the acceptance of moves of the monomers. The internal temperature, in contrast to the external temperature, is given by the occupation number of the states of a free bond in equihbrium. 

The Monte Carlo (MC) simulation is performed using standard procedures [33] for the Metropolis sampling technique in the isothermal-isobaiic ensemble, where the number of molecules N, the pressure P and the temperature T are fixed. As usual, we used the periodic boundary conditions and image method in a cubic box of size L. In our simulation, we use one F embedded in 1000 molecules of water in normal conditions (T—29S K and P= 1 atm). The F and the water molecules interact by the Lennard-Jones plus Coulomb potential with three parameters for each interacting site i (e, o, - and qi). 

With Monte Carlo methods, the adoption of the Metropolis sampling scheme intrinsically assumes equilibrium Boltzmann statistics, so special modifications are required to extend MC methods to non-equilibrium solvation as well. Fortunately, for a wide variety of processes, ignoring non-equilibrium solvation effects seems to introduce errors no larger than those already inherent from other approximations in the model, and thus both implicit and explicit models remain useful tools for studying chemical reactivity. 

To perform the isobaric-isothermal MC simulation [122], we perform Metropolis sampling on the scaled coordinates r, = L 1qi (qi are the real coordinates) and the volume V (here, the particles are placed in a cubic box of size L = /V). The trial moves from state x with the scaled coordinates r with volume V to state x with the scaled coordinate r and volume V are generated by uniform random numbers. The enthalpy is accordingly changed from Ti(E(r, V), V) to 7i E r, V), V) by these trial moves. The trial moves will be accepted with the probability... 

Matrix element, 55, 103 McLean-Chandler basis sets, 160 Mean held approximation, 64 Metal coordination compounds, force held, 36 Metropolis sampling, in Monte Carlo techiuques, 376... 

Step 3. While the counting number of Metropolis sampling step is less than N, i.e. IGM < N, go to step 4, otherwise, go to step 7. 

Our Monte Carlo (MC) simulation uses the Metropolis sampling technique and periodic boundary conditions with image method in a cubic box(21). The NVT ensemble is favored when our interest is in solvent effects as in this paper. A total of 344 molecules are included in the simulation with one solute molecule and 343 solvent molecules. The volume of the cube is determined by the density of the solvent and in all cases used here the temperature is T = 298K. The molecules are rigid in the equilibrium structure and the intermolecular interaction is the Lennard-Jones potential plus the Coulombic term... 

Molecular model-building (conformational search) methods fall into two general classes systematic and random. - Systematic methods search all possible combinations of torsional angles, whereas random methods usually involve a Monte Carlo (with Metropolis sampling ) or molecular dynamics trajectory. Both approaches attempt to search large areas of conformational space and eventually converge on the desired conformation or structure. Dis-... 

The key problem is how to create and sample the distribution (R) (from now on, for simplicity, we consider only real trial wavefunctions). This is readily done in a number of ways, possibly familiar from statistical mechanics. Probably the most common method is simple Metropolis sampling... 

Therefore, the entropy function can be determined from the Metropolis sampling probability by the relationship... 

---