Andreas Schöller1,2, Fiona Kearns3, H Lee Woodcock3, Stefan Boresch1. 1. Faculty of Chemistry, Department of Computational Biological Chemistry, University of Vienna, Währingerstrasse 17, A-1090 Vienna, Austria. 2. Vienna Doctoral School in Chemistry (DoSChem), University of Vienna, Währingerstrasse 42, A-1090 Vienna, Austria. 3. Department of Chemistry, University of South Florida, 4202 E. Fowler Avenue, CHE205, Tampa, Florida 33620-5250, United States.
Abstract
A key step during indirect alchemical free energy simulations using quantum mechanical/molecular mechanical (QM/MM) hybrid potential energy functions is the calculation of the free energy difference ΔAlow→high between the low level (e.g., pure MM) and the high level of theory (QM/MM). A reliable approach uses nonequilibrium work (NEW) switching simulations in combination with Jarzynski's equation; however, it is computationally expensive. In this study, we investigate whether it is more efficient to use more shorter switches or fewer but longer switches. We compare results obtained with various protocols to reference free energy differences calculated with Crooks' equation. The central finding is that fewer longer switches give better converged results. As few as 200 sufficiently long switches lead to ΔAlow→high values in good agreement with the reference results. This optimized protocol reduces the computational cost by a factor of 40 compared to earlier work. We also describe two tools/ways of analyzing the raw data to detect sources of poor convergence. Specifically, we find it helpful to analyze the raw data (work values from the NEW switching simulations) in a quasi-time series-like manner. Principal component analysis helps to detect cases where one or more conformational degrees of freedom are different at the low and high level of theory.
A key step during indirect alchemical free energy simulations using quantum mechanical/molecular mechanical (QM/MM) hybrid potential energy functions is the calculation of the free energy difference ΔAlow→high between the low level (e.g., pure MM) and the high level of theory (QM/MM). A reliable approach uses nonequilibrium work (NEW) switching simulations in combination with Jarzynski's equation; however, it is computationally expensive. In this study, we investigate whether it is more efficient to use more shorter switches or fewer but longer switches. We compare results obtained with various protocols to reference free energy differences calculated with Crooks' equation. The central finding is that fewer longer switches give better converged results. As few as 200 sufficiently long switches lead to ΔAlow→high values in good agreement with the reference results. This optimized protocol reduces the computational cost by a factor of 40 compared to earlier work. We also describe two tools/ways of analyzing the raw data to detect sources of poor convergence. Specifically, we find it helpful to analyze the raw data (work values from the NEW switching simulations) in a quasi-time series-like manner. Principal component analysis helps to detect cases where one or more conformational degrees of freedom are different at the low and high level of theory.
One of the major challenges
in chemistry and biochemistry is elucidating
thermodynamics and kinetics of enzyme–substrate interactions
at the angstrom level. Force field-based methods, in particular molecular
dynamics (MD) simulations, have become an essential method in this
area. They yield coordinates and velocities of each atom in the system
as a function of simulation time, and through statistical mechanics
these raw data can be connected to macroscopic properties at microscopic
resolution.[1,2] One application of particular interest is
the calculation of free energy differences (ΔA), the principal determinant of whether or not a chemical or biological
process will proceed spontaneously.[3−5] Areas in which free energy
simulations are used routinely include the computation of relative
binding affinities in drug development[6] as well as the calculation of absolute binding affinities.[7] These methods do not only provide predictions
of relative or absolute binding free energy differences but help to
better understand the mechanisms of protein–ligand[8,9] as well as protein–protein interactions.[10−12] Whenever a
chemical process of interest requires electronic scale details that
molecular mechanics (MM) force field cannot provide, the tool of choice
is hybrid quantum mechanical/molecular mechanical (QM/MM) calculations[13−16] for which the Nobel prize was awarded in 2013.[17] The need for QM/MM methods arises in many circumstances,
for example, prediction of pKa values
in complex environments, accurate description of metal ions, and many
more.[18−21] While free energy simulations (FES) with MM force fields has become
routine, QM/MM calculations remain computationally demanding, which
limits the applicability of QM/MM FES.[22,23] Furthermore,
several technical tricks routinely used in MM calculations of ΔA cease to work at the QM/MM level.[24] Therefore, FES at the QM/MM level of theory at acceptable cost[25] remains an elusive goal.One common strategy
to circumvent these problems is to employ an
indirect thermodynamic cycle, which takes advantage of the inherent
characteristic of free energy being a state function.[24] Suppose we want to compute a (relative) binding free energy
difference (Δ)ΔA for two ligands X and Y. Instead of computing the required alchemical
free energy differences ΔAhigh directly at a high
level of theory, for example, QM/MM, the alchemical transformation
is carried out at a low(er) level of theory, for example, MM. The
cycle is closed by the calculation of the free energy differences
between the low and high level of theory at the end points. So in
order to calculate ΔAhigh, the direct transformation
ΔAlow and the two correction steps ΔAlow→high and ΔAlow→high need to be computed. Although calculating the difficult to obtain
quantity ΔAhigh by means of three simpler and cheaper
steps seems enticing, the accurate calculation of the correction steps
is crucial and often a cause of failure due to convergence problems
and the need for extensive conformational sampling.[26,27] Further, the need for QM/MM energy/force evaluation during the correction
steps makes them per se an expensive task.Various approaches
to compute the corrections ΔAlow→high reliably, sometimes referred to as “bookending”
corrections, have been suggested.[28−31] We showed in previous work that
the use of nonequilibrium work simulations (NEW)[32] leads to converged values for the correction free energies
ΔAlow→high where other approaches
fail.[33−35] Since NEW calculations connecting two levels of theory
can easily become computationally impractical, it is imperative to
keep the cost of such calculations manageable to make real world applications
feasible. A related challenge is to find reliable indicators whether
a particular NEW switching protocol has resulted in converged results..[27] In the context of classical mechanical interactions,
a large body of work[36−39] is concerned with optimizing calculations using Jarzinsky’s
and Crooks’[40] relations. Some studies
have attempted to tune switching protocols in NEW simulations.[41−43] For example, by varying how the coupling parameter, λ, changes
during the alchemical FES (rate, as well as shape of the switching
protocol), the average work could be minimized although the effect
on statistical error and computational cost of the optimized protocols
was less clear.[43]In the present
context, that is, when attempting to compute ΔAlow→high, the most crucial factor is
the computational cost of the force/energy evaluations during the
switches since these require calculations at the high level of theory.
The overall mitigating factor is that one needs multiple switches,
which are completely independent calculations. In other words, the
computational cost of NEW switching simulations is a trivially parallelizable
task. This brings up the immediate question: is it more efficient
to carry out a large number of short switches, or does one achieve
better convergence of ΔAlow→high with fewer switches of longer simulation length? To formulate a
concrete example, which protocol leads to the best converged and most
accurate results: 10 000 switches of 100 MD steps each, 1000
switches of 1000 MD steps each, or 100 switches of 10 000 MD
steps each? On a single processor, the computational cost of the three
approaches is identical. If one has a large number of processors/machines
available, the first protocol will be computationally the most efficient;
however, it may not give the most accurate/precise result. For classical
force fields, for example, Hummer showed early on that fewer, longer
switching simulations lead to better convergence and, hence, more
accurate results.[36] Recently, Aldeghi et
al. carried out an analysis into this question to optimize protocols
for the calculation of absolute binding free energies when using classical
force fields and suggested switching lengths of 80 ps.[44] Such switching lengths, however, would be prohibitively
costly when employing QM/MM Hamiltonians; ideally, we would want to
carry out NEW switches of less than a few thousand MD steps. Since
switching lengths over fractions of a picosecond or just a few picoseconds
most likely result in end points far away from equilibrium, we wanted
to ascertain that the findings of, for example, Hummer[36] hold when computing ΔAlow→high using, by necessity, very short switching
simulations. Therefore, finding a good balance between computational
efficiency and accuracy of the results is the primary goal of this
study.In a recent work,[35] we introduced
the
“HiPen” test set, a collection of 22 molecules for which
we analyzed the convergence of ΔAlow→high. The compounds were selected from the Maybridge Hitfinder library
of drug-like compounds[45] based on several
criteria. In particular, we picked molecules based on the penalty
score when assigning CGenFF 3.0 parameters.[46,47] Parameter assignment by CGenFF (in particular dihedral angle parameters,
partial charges) relies on molecular similarity. A high penalty score
indicates that no close model compound could be found in CGenFF’s
database; therefore, the resulting parameters should be understood
as an “educated guess” only. In the present context,
we expected that such “high penalty” force field parameters,
at least for some of these compounds, would make it challenging to
compute the correction ΔAlow→high, even with NEW based switching methods. On the basis of the convergence
and agreement with reference results, the compounds were classified
as “good”, “bad,” or “ugly”.
In ref (35), a single
switching length was used based on previous experience with model
compounds. Similarly, a large number of switches (10 000 per
ΔAlow→high) were carried
out in an attempt to ensure convergence. Thus, our starting point
is to see whether this protocol can be optimized, in particular whether
comparable results can be achieved at significantly lower computational
cost by varying switching length, number of switching simulations,
or both. As in ref (35), we only compute ΔAlow→high for the individual test molecules in the gas phase.When initially
using the simulation protocols described in ref (35), we observed a few discrepancies
to our earlier results. This prompted us to search for ways to discern
and understand factors hindering convergence. In particular, we devised
two approaches/tools which not only helped us resolve the deviations
from the earlier results but which are generally useful to spot problems
when attempting to compute free energy differences between two levels
of theory. First, the raw data needed for Jarzynski’s equation[32] are the work values of changing the Hamiltonian
from the low to the high level of theory (cf. Theory
and Methods). A priori, there is no temporal ordering in these
work values. However, the switching simulations are started from restart
files generated from equilibrium simulations at the low of level theory;
thus, there is temporal ordering of how the starting points were generated.
Plotting the work values as if they formed a time series helped us
detect that in some cases our equilibration simulations had been too
short.Second, even after repeating the affected calculations
with a longer
equilibration, for some systems we still observed a (very) small number
of switches with outlying work values (i.e., work values deviating
significantly from the mean). When we analyzed convergence problems
in earlier work,[33,34] we always found strong indications
that these were caused from different preferred conformational substates
at the two levels of theory. Investigating such effects systematically
quickly becomes difficult once multiple dihedral angles are involved.
A possibly helpful tool is principal component analysis (PCA),[48] widely used in multivariate data analysis, which
not only detects correlations between multiple independent variables,
but also displays the relative contribution to the variance for each
variable (loadings) in a predictive way. Therefore, we explored whether
PCA makes it possible to identify problematic conformational degrees
of freedom, for example, dihedral angles, in a semiautomatic manner.The remainder of the manuscript is organized as follows. In Theory and Methods, we first summarize the theoretical
background and introduce the model systems used for validation. Next,
we present the technical details of all simulations carried out. Then,
we describe the quasi-time series approach to analyze work values
from nonequilibrium work (NEW) simulations, as well as our use of
principal component analysis (PCA). In Results, we begin by first showing data obtained based on the protocols
from the original HiPen study[35] and analyze
cases where convergence was unexpectedly poor using the quasi-time
series approach. This led to the use of extended equilibration simulations
and the final optimized protocols. We conclude by presenting illustrative
results obtained by PCA.
Theory and Methods
Theoretical Background
The focus of this study is the
free energy difference between two levels of theory, as needed in
indirect cycle QM/MM FES. As in our previous work,[33−35] we chose MM
as the low level, and the semi-empirical (SQM) SCC-DFTB method[49] as implemented in CHARMM[50] as the high level of theory. Our aim is to compute ΔAMM→SQM as accurately as possible while
keeping the computational cost low. To obtain these free energy differences,
we employed NEW simulations, using primarily Jarzynski’s equation[32]In eq , kB is Boltzmann’s constant, T is the temperature,
and W is the work
required to change the Hamiltonian from MM to SQM obtained from, as
we call them, “switching simulations”, often only referred
to as “switches”. As required by the theory behind eq , switches were started
from restart files written at regular intervals during an equilibrium
simulation at the MM level of theory at constant temperature and volume,
hence the subscript MM. The averaging, indicated by the angular brackets
⟨⟩, was carried out over the work values obtained from Nreplicate switches. This was one of the parameters
we varied systematically with the other being Nswitch, that is, the number of MD steps used per switch (cf.
below).In ref (35), results calculated with eq were not always converged. Thus, as in the previous work,[33−35] we used Crooks’ equation[40] to
obtain reference results. The superiority of Crooks’ relation
to reliably compute free energy differences when there is low overlap
between distributions of forward and backward work values, that is,
situations when Jarzinsky’s equation is expected to converge
poorly, is well documented in the literature.[36−39] To use Crooks’ relation,
equilibrium simulations at the high level of theory, as well as switches
from the high to the low level of theory (Whigh→low) are needed. Although this is too expensive for most practical applications,
it is relatively affordable when using SQM as the high level of theory,
permitting us to get reliable reference values for ΔAMM→SQM. Furthermore, several convergence
criteria permitting one to estimate the quality of results obtained
by Jarzynski’s equation require the knowledge of the distribution
of forward and backward work values (see also Supporting Information (SI)).[27,35,37,51]
Choice of Model Systems
We already described the HiPen
test set in the Introduction. The classification of a molecule as
“good”, “bad” or “ugly”
in ref (35) meant that
use of Jarzynski’s equation was sufficient to obtain converged
results for ΔAMM→SQM (“good”),
was not sufficient, that is, only Crooks’ equation worked (“bad”),
and even use of Crooks’ equation did not work (“ugly”).
As it seemed futile to attempt optimizing calculations, where we encountered
convergence problems even when using a very elaborate protocol, in
this study we focused primarily on the “good” compounds
from ref (35). Therefore,
all “good” compounds plus one “bad” compound 21 from the full HiPen set were picked as the test pool for
this study.These compounds are shown in Figure . To ease the comparison with ref (35), we keep the compound
IDs used there. The figure also indicates and labels some dihedral
angles which we considered to have an influence on the results. Where
possible, the dihedral angle labels used in ref (35) were kept. Some additional
details about the compounds, such as total number of atoms and number
of heavy atoms, as well as the respective offset which was subtracted
from all ΔAlow→high results,
can be found in Table S1 of SI.
Figure 1
Subset of HiPen
Data set considered in this work. Dihedral angles,
which were candidates for randomization and analysis, are labeled.
Subset of HiPen
Data set considered in this work. Dihedral angles,
which were candidates for randomization and analysis, are labeled.
Simulation Details
All simulations
were carried out
with CHARMM (developmental Version 44a2).[52] All simulations were carried out in the absence of solvent, neither
implicit, nor explicit (i.e., gas phase simulations).
Generation
of Starting Points for Nonequilibrium Switches
Preparation and Initial
Equilibration
Geometry optimized
starting coordinates, molecular topologies files and force field parameters
were taken from the freely available repository of the HiPen Data
set (DOI:10.5281/zenodo.2328952). For each molecule shown in Figure , eight starting coordinates were generated as follows:
Rotatable bonds were randomized, then the coordinates were minimized
for 1000 steps using the adopted basis set Newton–Raphson method[53,54] while restraining the dihedral angles to the respective random values
(harmonic dihedral restraints with a force constant of 100 kcal mol–1rad–2). After removing the restraints,
Langevin dynamics (LD) was carried out to equilibrate the system at
both the MM and SQM levels of theory. A friction coefficient of 5
ps–1 was applied to all atoms and random velocities
were assigned at each step corresponding to a temperature bath of
300 K. Following the initial protocol from ref (35), the length of this equilibration
simulation was 10 ps.For five compounds, 2, 7, 10, 12, and 21,
all simulations described below were repeated using a more elaborate
equilibration protocol. First, the length of the equilibration simulation
was extended to 5 ns in the MM case and 500 ps in the SQM case. Second,
for compound 7 the randomization of dihedral angles was
modified compared to ref (35). In Figure S1, we show the dihedrals
and their labels considered by Kearns et al. and compare them with
the present work. As one can see, choosing χ1old (Figure S1a) simply was an oversight;
there is no point in randomizing a dihedral angle in a heterocycle.
Similarly, randomizing χ3old can lead
to an isomerization around the C=N double bond (cis ↔
trans), which for oximes does not occur under the simulation conditions.[55] Thus, we chose not to randomize these two dihedrals
in the modified equilibration, prompting the change in labeling for
the dihedrals (cf. Figure S1). For 7, this left a single dihedral angle (i.e., χ2old in the old; χ1 in the new labeling
scheme) as a candidate for randomization. To understand the implications
of randomizing χ1 (χ2old), we calculated potential energy scans at the MM and 3OB levels
of theory (see Figure S2). The global minimum
for dihedral χ1 is at ±180° with a secondary
local minimum at 0°. Given that there are two minima, randomizing
χ1 is an option. However, as the potential energy
scans (see Figure S2) show, the barriers
separating the two minima are high, and it seems unlikely that adequate
sampling according to their Boltzmann weight would occur during the
simulations. For this reason, we decided not to randomize χ1; its initial value was set to 180°. Note that the dihedral
angle χ2 indicated in Figure for compounds 2 and 7 was never considered for randomization; it is included in the figure
because it turned out to be relevant for analysis.
MM Simulations
Eight LD simulations were carried out,
starting from the eight coordinate sets obtained by the preparation
and initial equilibration procedure just described. On top of the
different coordinates, random initial velocities were assigned in
each of the simulations. The simulation length was 10 ns, that is,
10 million LD steps with a time step of 1 fs. Restart files were written
at every 1000th step. Thus, during a cumulative simulation length
of 80 ns, 80 000 restart files were saved, serving as the pool
to carry out nonequilibrium switching simulations to the high (SQM)
level of theory. The molecules were fully flexible, and nonbonded
interactions were not truncated (“infinite” cutoff radius).
SQM Simulations
For each of the eight starting structures
equilibrated at the SQM level of theory, a LD simulation of 1 ns (1
million steps with a time step of 1 fs) was carried out. Restart files
were written every 100th step, thus resulting in a total of 80 000
restart files generated during a cumulative simulation length of 8
ns. The self-consistent charge density functional tight-binding method
as implemented in CHARMM[50] with the 3ob-3-1
parameter set (https://www.dftb.org/parameters/download/3ob/3ob-3-1-cc/)[56−59] was used.
Nonequilibrium Work Simulations
Using the restart files
written during equilibrium simulations at the MM and SQM levels of
theory, nonequilibrium switches MM → SQM and SQM → MM
were carried out. As described in detail in earlier work,[33] the mixing of Hamiltonians was done with the
MSCALE functionality of CHARMM[60] and the
work value W during the switch was accumulated with
CHARMM’s PERT module[52] in slow-growth
mode. The time step during the switching simulations was 1 fs. The
Hamiltonian was changed linearly from MM to SQM (“forward”)
and SQM to MM (“backward”) during a period of 200 fs
(200 steps, NSWI200), 500 fs (500 steps, NSWI500), 1000 fs (1000 steps,
NSWI1000) and 2000 fs (2000 steps, NSWI2000); cf. Table . A “reduced”
protocol in which we used only a quarter of the switches generated
for NSWI2000 is referred to as NSWI2000red.
Table 1
Combinations of Switching Length Nswitch in fs and Number of Switches (Nreplicate) Studieda
Nswitch [fs]
Nreplicate
blocksize
ttotal [ns]
NSWI200
200
8000
1000
1.6
NSWI500
500
3200
400
1.6
NSWI1000
1000
1600
200
1.6
NSWI2000
2000
800
100
1.6
NSWI2000red
2000
200
25
0.4
Except for NSWI2000red, in which a reduced subset of the
NSWI2000 data was used, the cumulative
length of all switching steps ttotal is
identical in all cases to keep computational cost constant. The column
“blocksize” indicates the number of switches started
from restart files saved during each of the eight equilibrium simulations
carried out for each system.
Except for NSWI2000red, in which a reduced subset of the
NSWI2000 data was used, the cumulative
length of all switching steps ttotal is
identical in all cases to keep computational cost constant. The column
“blocksize” indicates the number of switches started
from restart files saved during each of the eight equilibrium simulations
carried out for each system.Depending on the switching length, Nswitch, the nonequilibrium simulations were launched only from every 10th
(NSWI200), 25th (NSWI500), 50th (NSWI1000), and 100th (NSWI2000) restart
file saved during the equilibrium simulations. This results in the
number of switches summarized in Table . Switches were carried out in both the forward and
backward direction. While the focus of this work is on the forward
(MM to SQM) direction using Jarzynski’s eq (eq ), the backward work values were
needed for histograms and densities of work distributions in the two
directions, as well as to compute reference values using Crooks’
equation. The densities, as shown, for example, in Figure , were calculated with R (version
3.4.4)[61] using the built-in density() function
based on kernel density estimation without adjusting the bandwidth
manually or giving any additional parameters (density.default).[62−66]
Figure 2
(Top)
Example of a non-Gaussian distribution of MM → SQM
work values W. Additional modes of more negative
work values are circled in red. The average work value W̅ is indicated by a green line and W̅ –
3σ by a red line. (Bottom) Same data displayed as a “quasi”
time series; green and red lines indicate W̅ and W̅ – 3σ as before. Individual
switches with working values deviating by more than 3σ are highlighted
by green circles. All work values are in kcal/mol.
(Top)
Example of a non-Gaussian distribution of MM → SQM
work values W. Additional modes of more negative
work values are circled in red. The average work value W̅ is indicated by a green line and W̅ –
3σ by a red line. (Bottom) Same data displayed as a “quasi”
time series; green and red lines indicate W̅ and W̅ – 3σ as before. Individual
switches with working values deviating by more than 3σ are highlighted
by green circles. All work values are in kcal/mol.The major goal of this study is to search for an optimal
combination
of switching length Nswitch and number
of switches Nreplicate, or, phrased differently,
to answer the question whether it is better to use many short switches
or fewer longer switches. The combinations of Nswitch and Nreplicate listed in Table make possible such
a comparison as the cumulative number of simulation steps is identical
for each of the four cases; that is, on a single processor the computational
effort would be identical. In the following, the shorthands NSWI200,
NSWI500, and so forth will not only be used to indicate switching
lengths of 200 fs, 500 fs, and so forth, but to denote the respective
protocols (combination of switching length and number of switches)
shown in Table .
“Quasi Time Series” Analysis
The distribution
of work values obtained from forward and backward switches is often
far from Gaussian; quite frequently it is even multimodal. A prototypical
example is shown in the top plot of Figure ; the data are for molecule 2 using the 10 ps equilibration simulation. The red circles indicate
two clusters of work values which are noticeably more negative from
the mean W̅ (green line). The red line indicates W̅ – 3σ; consequently, more negative
work values are expected to occur rarely. Since highly negative work
values have a significant weight in Jarzynski’s eq , they might be responsible for
systematic deviations between results obtained by Jarzynski’s
and Crooks’ equation, or be the reason for slow convergence.From a distribution of work values, details about outliers leading
to additional modes and/or shoulders in the main mode are difficult
to discern. Ideally, the work values one uses are statistically independent.
In the present work, the NSWI200 switches were started from restart
files written in 10 ps intervals,and for the NSWI2000 switches the
interval was 100 ps (cf. above). When computing the average in Jarzynski’s
equation, the ordering of the work values is irrelevant. Nevertheless,
the generation of the restart files introduces a partial temporal
ordering. The eight simulations during which the restart files were
written are indeed statistically independent (different initial velocities
and coordinates). Within each of the simulations, however, restart
files were written out in order and statistical independence cannot
be guaranteed. We, therefore, decided to treat and plot our data (work
values) as if they formed a time series.This is shown in the
bottom plot of Figure . The eight “sections” separated
by thin gray lines correspond to the eight independent simulations
during which restart files were written; we refer to these as “blocks”.
Within such a section/block, the work values are plotted in the temporal
order in which the restart files were saved. The example shown in
the figure is for the NSWI2000 data, that is, 100 switches were started
from the full set of restart files saved during the respective equilibrium
simulation. Rather than resetting the counter between independent
simulations, we number the switches from 1–100 for the first
simulation, 101–200 for the second simulation, and so forth,
as shown on the x-axis of the plot. We refer to this
representation of the work values as a “quasi time series”.
As in the density plot (top of Figure ), W̅ is indicated as a green
and W̅ – 3σ as a red line. Plotting
the data in such a manner automatically leads to a simple labeling
scheme for the individual switches; for example, switch 341 is the
41th NSWI2000 switch started from restart files saved during the fourth
out of the eight independent equilibration simulations.A plot
as shown at the bottom of Figure now makes it straightforward to pinpoint
the switches leading to the effects reflected in the corresponding
density plot. In particular, one can easily identify four work values
(highlighted by green circles), which deviate from W̅ by more than 3σ. In the following, we will often refer to
work values with W < W̅ – 3σ as “outliers”. The threshold W̅ – 3σ is somewhat arbitrary, but it
is an easily applied criterion to automatically detect and flag highly
negative work values. The occurrence of such “outliers”
does not indicate that something is wrong; given a sufficiently large
number of NEW switches, such negative work values are to be expected.
Nevertheless, it may be insightful to understand why a particular
switch (switching path) results in a significantly more negative work
value. In the quasi time series in Figure , one further sees two regions with work
values somewhat more negative than W̅; these
are responsible for the slight shoulder toward more negative work
values in the main peak of the distribution of work values.
Principal
Component Analysis (PCA)
To investigate the
factors resulting in outliers, we used principal component analysis
(PCA). As raw data, we used the work values and selected values of
dihedral angles (cf. Figure ) before (χpre) and after the switch (χpost). PCA was carried out with R (version 3.4.4)[61] using the built-in pcrcomp() function, which
calculates the principal components via singular value decomposition,
either on the unscaled or the scaled data matrix.[62,66,67] Scaled PCA was employed for collective variables
with different value-regimes (e.g., work values W and dihedral angles χ); the unscaled
version was used when including dihedral angles only. To gauge consistency,
the cumulative sum of the principal components’ variance quantity
was always calculated. Generating the input for the PCA is trivial
and the computational effort is negligible. The work values are available
anyways, and the CHARMM input scripts for carrying out the switching
simulations were modified to save selected dihedrals before and after
the nonequilibrium molecular dynamics run.
Results
Optimization
of Switching Simulations
Figure shows the results of the NEW-switching
simulations in the forward (MM → SQM) direction obtained with
the original short equilibration protocol. Each data point represents
the differencebetween the free energy difference obtained
by Jarzynski’s equation ΔAJARMM→SQM for a particular switching length and the
best reference result obtained by Crooks’ equation ΔACROMM⇄SQM. Figure S4 is identical to Figure but also includes error estimates. For detailed
results of all conducted switching lengths, including convergence
metrics, see Tables S3–S6. These
tables also list the results obtained by Crooks’ relation for
the switching protocols of different length; as one can see, there
is almost no variation with switching length, indicating that these
results are well converged. Some results are not included in Figure as they are off-scale
(specifically the NSWI1000 result for 7 (δΔA = −1.6 kcal/mol, and all results for 21 (δΔA = −6.1, −4.6, −3.3,
and −1.0 kcal/mol for NSWI200, NSWI500, NSWI1000, and NSWI2000,
respectively); these will be discussed shortly.
Figure 3
δΔA (eq ) for
the results of the forward switching simulations
(MM → SQM) using the original equilibration protocol as a function
of switching length. Some values are off-scale; Figure S3 shows the same data including all values.
δΔA (eq ) for
the results of the forward switching simulations
(MM → SQM) using the original equilibration protocol as a function
of switching length. Some values are off-scale; Figure S3 shows the same data including all values.One can clearly see that in most cases the longest
switching protocol
(NSWI2000, green diamond) is closest to the respective reference result.
Illustrative examples are, for example, 3 and 4, where in terms of δΔA, NSWI2000 <
NSWI1000 < NSWI500 < NSWI200; that is, using 800 switches of
2000 fs leads to better results than 1600 switches of 1000 fs and
so forth. The ordering is not always perfect; for example, for 11 the NSWI500 result is slightly better than NSWI1000; nevertheless,
the lowest-magnitude δΔA is obtained
with the NWSI2000 protocol. While there are exceptions (2, 7, 10, and 21), which will
be analyzed next, Figure strongly suggests that it is more efficient to conduct fewer
longer switches than many short ones. In most cases, 800 2 ps switches
delivered a more reliable result than 8000 200 fs switches while requiring
the same computational effort.To better understand the problematic
cases, we present more detailed
plots of δΔA as a function of switching
length. In Figure , we plot δΔA versus Nswitch for compound 12, our reference which
has ideal behavior, as well as for three of the four outliers 2, 10, and 21. These represent different
“types” of deviation. The fourth outlier, 7, behaved somewhat similarly to 2. Both 2 (Figure b) and 7 do not obey the general trend that increasing switching
length reduces δΔA. For 2, NSWI1000 gives an almost perfect result whereas the longer NSWI2000
protocol deviates from the reference result by almost as much as NSWI200
and NSWI500. In the case of 7, NSWI500 and NSWI2000 perform
well, but NSWI1000 deviates significantly from the reference result.
Compound 10 exhibits the curious behavior of a systematic
offset compared to the reference result, which does not become noticeably
smaller as the switching length increases and remains at 0.4 kcal/mol
even for NSWI2000 (Figure c). Finally, at first glance 21 behaves as expected
(Figure d); that is,
δΔA becomes smaller as the switching
length increases, but even when using switching lengths of 2 ps, the
deviation to the reference result remains unacceptably high (∼−1
kcal/mol). In principle, the result for 21 was not surprising
as it was classified as a “bad” compound.
Figure 4
Detailed dependence
of δΔA on switching
length for (a) compounds 12 (b) 2 and 7, (c) 10, and (d) 21.
Detailed dependence
of δΔA on switching
length for (a) compounds 12 (b) 2 and 7, (c) 10, and (d) 21.
”Quasi Time Series” Analysis of Switching Simulations
Our starting point to understand why the results for compounds 2, 7, 10, and 21 failed
to improve when increasing Nswitch was
to scrutinize their forward and backward work distributions. For all
of them, the distributions were far from Gaussian, and in all cases
there was a non-negligible number of switches with distinctively more
negative work values. An illustrative example is shown in Figure . Since these outliers
have high weight in Jarzynski’s equation, these were likely
responsible for the systematic deviations of the forward results from
the reference values obtained using Crooks’ equation.An obvious question to ask is whether these outliers occur at random,
or whether there is some correlation to the order in which the starting
coordinates (restart files) for the switches were generated. Therefore,
as described in the subsection “Quasi Time
Series” Analysis, we plotted the work values as a quasi
time series. Illustrative examples for the initial simulation protocols
(Nswitch = 2000) are shown in Figure a for 10 and Figure a for 21. The eight blocks of data (restart files) are marked by
the vertical gray lines.
Figure 5
Quasi time series of Compound 10 plotted as W [kcal/mol] for the 2000 fs switches
versus switch index,
concatenating the underlying equilibrium simulations for (a) the original
protocol and (b) for the modified protocol.
Figure 6
Quasi
time series of Compound 21 plotted as W [kcal/mol] for the 2000 fs switches versus switch index,
concatenating the underlying equilibrium simulations for (a) the original
protocol and for (b) the modified protocol.
Quasi time series of Compound 10 plotted as W [kcal/mol] for the 2000 fs switches
versus switch index,
concatenating the underlying equilibrium simulations for (a) the original
protocol and (b) for the modified protocol.Quasi
time series of Compound 21 plotted as W [kcal/mol] for the 2000 fs switches versus switch index,
concatenating the underlying equilibrium simulations for (a) the original
protocol and for (b) the modified protocol.Focusing on negative outliers, work values W < W̅ –
3σW (see the −3σ line in red in Figures and 6), one notices that they occur often at the beginning of a
replica, that is, at the beginning of one of the eight independent
sets of starting points. For example, for 10 there are
outliers near switch number 400, 500, and 700 (see Figure a), and for 21 there is a sizable number of switches with significantly more negative
work values starting at switching number 0, as well as few values
near switching number 500 (see Figure a). In other words, several switches started from restart
files generated early during the respective equilibrium simulation
at the MM level of theory led to unusually negative work values. Note
that this is not always the case, for example, for 10 several switches after switch number 560 also give low work values
(see Figure a). This
observation prompted us to scrutinize our protocol for system preparation
and equilibration (cf. Generation of Starting Points
for Nonequilibrium Switches), and we repeated the full sequence
of simulations for 2, 7, 10, and 21 with the (much) longer equilibration simulations
following the random dihedral angle assignment. To ensure that this
did not affect the unproblematic cases, the longer protocol was also
applied to 12.The effect on the quasi time series
of the work values is displayed
for 10 and 21 in Figures b and 6b, respectively.
For 21, all negative outliers have effectively disappeared,
and for 10 their occurrence is much rarer. While we do
not show the plots for 2 and 7 (see Figures S6 and S7), the overall picture is very
similar. Occasional negative outliers, work values with W < W̅ –
3σW, remain, but their frequency is reduced. The
modified protocol has a dramatic quality of the overall results, as
can be seen in Figure and Table . Now,
the longest switching protocol NSWI2000 leads to the lowest deviation
δΔA from the reference in almost all
cases; any deviations, such as for 7, where δΔA(NSWI1000) < δΔA(NSWI2000),
are so small as to be irrelevant in practice. Most surprisingly, 21 for which we had obtained large δΔA values for all switching lengths, in line with its initial classification
as “bad”, is now “perfectly behaved”.
Full results for all compounds repeated with the longer equilibration
protocol can be found in Tables S3–S6, and Figure S5 shows the data in Figure with error bars. Figure S8 displays the convergence behavior as
a function of switching length, analogously to Figure above, for 12, 2, 10, and 21.
Figure 7
δΔA calculated as the difference between
two-sided method CRO and one-sided method JAR for switching forward
(MM → SQM) after correcting the equilibration period for 2, 7, 10, 12, and 21 from 10 ps to 5 ns for MM and from 10 ps to 0.5 ns for
SQM after random dihedral assignment procedure.
Table 2
MAD and
Root Mean Square Error (RMSE)
of Results Obtained from Forward Switches and Jarzynski’s Equation
Compared to Reference Result Obtained by Crooks’ Equation (CRO)
Including Corrected Results for 2, 7, 10, and 21
MAD [kcal/mol]
RMSE [kcal/mol]
NSWI200
0.27
0.31
NSWI500
0.08
0.09
NSWI1000
0.08
0.09
NSWI2000
0.04
0.05
NSWI2000red
0.06
0.08
δΔA calculated as the difference between
two-sided method CRO and one-sided method JAR for switching forward
(MM → SQM) after correcting the equilibration period for 2, 7, 10, 12, and 21 from 10 ps to 5 ns for MM and from 10 ps to 0.5 ns for
SQM after random dihedral assignment procedure.Having identified the NSWI2000 protocol as the most reliable method
to compute free energy differences ΔAlow→high using Jarzynski’s equation, we attempted to reduce the computational
effort further. Specifically, we lowered the number of switches per
block from 100 to 25, that is, using Nreplicate = 200 instead of 800. These results are labeled NSWI2000red and are included in Figure (green stars) and Table . While the mean absolute deviation (MAD) of NSWI2000red is slightly larger than for NSWI2000, it is still smaller
than MAD(NSWI1000) at one-quarter of the computational cost. As can
be seen in Figure , most δΔA values remain almost unchanged
though, for example, for 2 there is already some deterioration.The use of quasi time series analysis suggested corrections to
our simulation protocol and dramatically improved the convergence
of the computed ΔAMM→SQM values.
Nevertheless, as one sees, for example, in Figure b, even when employing the longer equilibration
protocol some work values remain outliers, based on our criterion
of deviations by more than three standard deviations from W̅. In principle, considerably more negative work
values could bias the free energy difference computed by Jarzynski’s
equation. To check whether this is the case here, we recomputed ΔAlow→high using Jarzynski’s equation
for 2, 7, 10, and 21. The results for the work values from the NSWI2000 and NSWI2000red switching protocols with the outliers present or removed
are shown in Table .
Table 3
Outlier Impact on JAR (fw) for 2, 7, 10, and 21 for
NSWI2000 and NSWI2000red with and without Outliersa
NOutliers
δΔA
NSWI2000
NSWI2000red
NSWI2000
NSWI2000*
NSWI2000red
NSWI2000red*
2
4
0
–0.14
0.26
0.24
0.24
7
4
1
–0.07
0.10
0.08
0.10
10
4
1
–0.06
0.12
–0.06
0.09
21
5
1
0.01
0.04
–0.05
0.01
The results are displayed as
δΔA in kcal/mol, similarly to Figure and Figure . NOutliers is the number of outliers identified in the time series like analysis
in the NSWI2000 and NSWI2000red raw data. A * denotes results
obtained with all outliers excluded from the calculation.
The results are displayed as
δΔA in kcal/mol, similarly to Figure and Figure . NOutliers is the number of outliers identified in the time series like analysis
in the NSWI2000 and NSWI2000red raw data. A * denotes results
obtained with all outliers excluded from the calculation.For 7, 10, and 21, the difference
in δΔA with and without the outliers
is less than 0.2 kcal/mol, which is negligible in practice. The free
energy difference is shifted slightly to more positive values, as
expected. For each of these three compounds, the reduced set of work
values NSWI2000red still contains one of the outliers.
For 2, the difference between the NSWI2000 (outliers
included) and NSWI2000* (outliers excluded) results is 0.4 kcal/mol.
While not negligible anymore, this is most likely still acceptable.
More importantly, however, for 2 the reduced NSWI2000red set does not contain a single outlier. As seen in Figure , 2 is
the single case where using just 200 work values affected the result
noticeably; this is the result of the reduced data set incidentally
not containing any of the “outliers”.
PCA of Switching
Simulations
In earlier work,[34,35] we showed
that different conformational preferences at the two levels
of theory had a noticeable impact on convergence. Therefore, it seemed
likely that the outliers in terms of more negative work values were
somehow correlated with dihedral degrees of freedom. We used PCA to
investigate this question systematically and to identify the specific
degree(s) of freedom responsible. As described in Principal Component Analysis, our input variables are the
dihedral angles considered relevant before and after the switching
simulations (see Figure ), as well as the work values themselves. In the following, we focus
on compounds 2 and 7. For both systems,
even using the extended equilibration protocol, we obtained isolated
outliers in the work values (deviating by more than 3σ from W̅).Results of the PCA analysis for 2 are summarized in Figure . The data shown are for the final, long equilibration protocol;
the plots for the original protocol can be found Figure S9. The corresponding quasi time series analysis is
shown in Figure S6. Figure a is the scaled PCA in which dihedral values
χ1, χ2, and work W were used as inputs. For the dihedral angles, we distinguish the
values before (denoted as χpre) and after (χpost) the switch. Highlighting of outliers, colored in red
rather than green, and with explicit labels added, was done in an
automated manner during the calculation/plotting of the PCA results
according to the predefined criteria with respect to deviation from W̅ or |χ̅2post|;
cf. “Quasi Time Series” Analysis. The arrows in the plot are the loading vectors describing which
feature of the input data correlates with the calculated principal
component and in which way (positive/negative).
Figure 8
PCA of compound 2 plotted as PC1 versus PC2 for the
longer equilibration protocol as (a) scaled version and (b) unscaled
version. Outliers are labeled explicitly and marked by red triangles
(rather than green dots) according to the predefined outlier criteria
(deviations less than W̅ – 3σ
for panel a, and |χ̅2post| –
3σ for panel b, cf. “Quasi Time Series”
Analysis).
PCA of compound 2 plotted as PC1 versus PC2 for the
longer equilibration protocol as (a) scaled version and (b) unscaled
version. Outliers are labeled explicitly and marked by red triangles
(rather than green dots) according to the predefined outlier criteria
(deviations less than W̅ – 3σ
for panel a, and |χ̅2post| –
3σ for panel b, cf. “Quasi Time Series”
Analysis).We start with the scaled
PCA plot for 2 shown in Figure a. Four switches
(322, 605, 653, and 668) behave very differently; based on outlier
criterion W̅–3σ, they were colored
in red automatically. These are exactly the switches which can be
easily discerned in the quasi time series analysis; see Figure S6b. The four switches are located in
the opposite direction of the loading vector for W indicating an unusual negative deviation of the feature W. Besides W, χ2post has the largest loadings vector among all the variables, suggesting
that this conformational degree of freedom may be of relevance as
it accounts for a large proportion of the variance. In the unscaled
PCA, shown in Figure b, we used |χ̅2post| – 3σ
as the criterion for outlier detection (cf. “Quasi
Time Series” Analysis). The only switches highlighted
by the automated coloring are 322, 605, 653, and 668. This demonstrates
that the four negative values in W are correlated
and, possibly caused, by their χ2post value.Practically all switches from MM to SQM result in a χ2post values around ±180° (green dots),
meaning that the dihedral angle about the N–O bond is in the
trans configuration. By contrast, the four outliers (colored in red)
have χ2post values of approximately 0°.
In other words, these switches end in a cis configuration around the
N–O bond. Thus, for compound 2 PCA not only detects
the outliers but immediately makes clear how these switches differ
from the rest.Plots for the PCA of compound 7 when
using the modified
protocol are shown in Figure . The corresponding quasi time series and the PCA for the
switches obtained with the original protocol can be found in Figures S7 and S10. Some similarities to 2 are expected as both molecules have an oxime moiety in close
proximity to a hydrogen bond acceptor. Figure a shows the plot of the first two principal
components for the scaled PCA. Labeling and coloring in red switches
based on the W̅ – 3σ criterion
identifies the four outliers which can also be discerned in the quasi
time series plot (Figure S7b). As for 2, these four switches are located in the opposite direction
of the loading vector for W. In this case, the loading
vector W has the smallest magnitude of all the variables,
thus contributing the least to the variance. On the other hand, the
correlation with χ2post is even more obvious
because the corresponding loading vector points almost in the same
direction as for W, indicating that both variables
contribute in the same way to the variance (both variables contribute
positively to PC1 and PC2). However, the magnitudes of the loading
vectors for χ1, both pre and post, as well as χ2pre are quite similar, indicating that all angles
contribute equally to the variance. Two of the outliers, which were
colored automatically in red, are reasonably well separated (253 and
740), whereas 152 is located in a cluster of “normal”
switches and 484 is in close proximity to one. Studying the quasi
time series (Figure S7b), one sees that
152 barely triggers the outlier criterion, which may explain the overlap
with other switches. Overall, however, in the case of 7 the outliers are not as well separated as for 2; the
ability to color them automatically is needed.
Figure 9
PCA of compound 7 plotted as PC1 versus PC2 for the
longer equilibration protocol as (a) scaled version and (b) unscaled
version. Outliers are labeled explicitly and marked by red triangles
(rather than green dots) according to the predefined outlier criteria
(deviations less than W̅ – 3σ
for panel a, and |χ̅2post| –
3σ for panel b, cf. “Quasi Time Series”
Analysis).
PCA of compound 7 plotted as PC1 versus PC2 for the
longer equilibration protocol as (a) scaled version and (b) unscaled
version. Outliers are labeled explicitly and marked by red triangles
(rather than green dots) according to the predefined outlier criteria
(deviations less than W̅ – 3σ
for panel a, and |χ̅2post| –
3σ for panel b, cf. “Quasi Time Series”
Analysis).Figure b shows
the first two principle components of the unscaled PCA. Applying the
|χ̅2post| – 3σ criterion
identifies all four switches already discerned in Figure a. Analogous to what was observed
for 2, all switches start with χ2pre around ±180°, and the four switches ending with
χ2post values around 0° result in
unusually negative work values. While the outliers (with respect to
χ2post) are somewhat separated from most
of the other switches, they would be difficult to discern without
the automatic coloring. Nevertheless, PCA facilitated the task considerably.
In the scaled PCA, outliers are flagged, that is, colored in red,
based on the W < W̅ –
3σ criterion, and consideration of the loading vectors strongly
indicated to analyze the role of χ2post. Moreover, it is straightforward to exclude other possibilities
by applying the |χ| < |χ̅| – 3σ
criterion to the remaining dihedral degrees of freedom. If one does
this, very different switches with work values close to W̅ are flagged. This shows that these degrees of freedom are not related
to the occurrence of a highly negative work value. Since we use PCA
as implemented in R (cf. Theory and Methods), these analyses can be carried out interactively and can be automated,
at least to some degree. In this manner, such an analysis can be carried
out in a short amount of time, even if more than two dihedral degrees
of freedom need to be considered.The analysis of both 2 and 7 indicates
a strong correlation between the dihedral angle about the N–O
bond after the switch and negative work values (W < W̅ – 3σ). As pointed out in earlier work,[34,35] even when using NEW methods configurational mismatches between the
different levels of theory are a possible reason for convergence problems.
While in this specific case the convergence of the result was not
affected significantly (see Table ), the PCA analysis suggests that there are different
conformational preferences at the low and high level of theory. A
more detailed analysis of configurational sampling about χ2 at the two levels of theory, that is, of the production simulations
during which restart files were generated, shows that at the MM level
of theory the cis-configuration about the N–O bond of the oxime
moiety present in 2 and 7 is never sampled.
By contrast, at the SCC-DFTB level of theory values of |χ2pre| ≤ 53° were observed ∼13%
of the time.The rare forward switches, during which a trans
→ cis configurational
change for χ2 occurs, lead to untypically negative
work values. As previously stated, χ2 values around
0° are sampled at the SQM level of theory; therefore, such conformational
changes during the switch are not artifacts. The remaining question
is why they result in more negative work values. In Figure S2, we show a potential energy scan as a function of
the χ1 and χ2 angles for 7 at the MM level of theory (λ = 0), the midpoint between MM
and SQM (λ = 0.5), and the SQM level of theory (λ = 1).
At the SQM end point, χ2 values of ±180°
and 0° are quite close energetically, although χ2 = ±180° is the global minimum conformation. The comparison
of the three energy surfaces shown in Figure S2 suggests the following explanation: As the potential energy surface
changes from MM to SQM, a shallow minimum around χ1 = ±180°/χ2 = 0° develops, which
is already clearly discernible in the plot for λ = 0.5 (Figure S2, middle). At λ = 0.5 the barrier
separating the minima at χ1 = ±180°/±χ2 = 180° and χ1 = ±180°/χ2 = 0° is lower by about 2 kcal/mol than at the SQM end
point (≈13% ≈ 4 instead of >6 kcal/mol). Therefore,
conformational changes from χ2 = ±180°
to 0° can certainly occur, although given the short switching
length of 2 ps it is not surprising that they are rare. As one sees
from Figure S2 (left), at the MM level
of theory the minimum energy basin about χ1/χ2 = ±180°/±180° is quite wide, particularly
in the χ2 direction. Thus, χ2 values
of ±100° or even ±90° are quite accessible and
are sampled at the MM level of theory. In other words, starting configurations
|χ2| < 100° are close to the top of the barrier
at λ = 0.5, and if their starting velocities point in the right
direction the barrier can be overcome. Indeed, all four switches that
ended in the χ1 = ±180°/χ2 = 0° minimum started from such configurations. As the switch
progresses, the system then slides down toward the local energy minimum
at χ2 = 0° at the SQM end point, resulting in
a more negative work value compared to systems which remain around
χ1/χ2 = ±180°/±180°
throughout the switching simulation.
Discussion/Conclusions
We systematically investigated the convergence of Jarzynski’s
equation applied to computing ΔAMM→SQM as a function of switching length and number of nonequilibrium work
values used for averaging. The data clearly indicate that using fewer
but longer switches leads to better converged and hence more accurate
results. This is in line with earlier results,[36] but it was important to ascertain that this does hold even
in the regime of very short switching lengths, given that all the
protocols which are computationally feasible, including NSWI2000,
are far from equilibrium. Our findings lead to immediate practical
benefits. Using the best protocol (800 switches of 2 ps length, NSWI2000)
reduces the computational cost compared to the naive protocol of the
original “HiPen” study[35] by
almost a factor of 10. Having identified the NSWI2000 protocol as
a reliable way to compute ΔAlow→high, we optimized it even further, 200 rather than 800 switches (NSWI2000red). With this final protocol, we obtained as good if not
better results compared to ref (35) at 1/40 of the cost. At the same time, the present
protocol remains trivially parallel, and if multiple computers and/or
CPU cores are available one can compute the corrections ΔAMM→SQM efficiently.When attempting
to understand possible sources of poor or slow
convergence, two tools proved very helpful: (i) plotting the work
values not only as a histogram but as a quasi time series, and (ii)
employing PCA to detect correlations between outliers with respect
to work values and conformational degrees of freedom before and after
the switch. It should be stressed that these tools/utilities require
as input either quantities one needs to compute anyways, such as the
nonequilibrium work values, or quantities which can be calculated
extremely fast, such as dihedral angles. In other words, very useful
insights can be obtained at little or no cost. We employed both methods
using the statistical software system R, which provides a convenient
interface for plotting and carrying out the PCA. This facilitated
detecting and understanding the source of outliers considerably. However,
once the raw data are available, various programs could be used for
these analyses.In all cases which we analyzed in detail, the
cause of outlying
work values could be traced to a conformational degree of freedom,
which for these relatively simple systems was always a dihedral angle.
In many applications of computational chemistry, rotamers need to
be enumerated and/or the corresponding dihedral angles identified.
Our experience suggests that such degrees of freedom should be routinely
analyzed, for example, by PCA, to detect and understand possible convergence
problems.In this study we deliberately focused on the “good”
compounds from the full “HiPen” data set. More efficient
protocols to obtain the work values needed for Jarzynski’s
equation may not be enough for the “bad” and “ugly”
cases. Here, techniques like force matching[68] to make the low level of theory more high level like or the judicious
use of intermediate stages to carry out the low to high transformation[31] may be needed. Further, better equilibration
and sampling strategies, such as self-guided Langevin dynamics (SGLD)[69,70] in preparation for the equilibrium simulations during which the
starting points for the switching step are written, should prove helpful.
The combination with optimized protocols to obtain the nonequilibrium
work values needed will make it possible to compute the correction
ΔAMM→SQM reliably and with
sufficient efficiency.