Re: [gmx-users] Re: question about free energy. Gromacs user

2007-08-14 Thread Maik Goette
Because you are quite greedy with parameters, one can just rougly assume that,e.g. your distance restraints are too short and therefore just kind of bend your ligand. Therefore it seems to find an energy minimum in modifiying some internal degrees of freedom to your restraint potential. Maybe

Re: [gmx-users] Re: question about free energy. Gromacs user

2007-08-11 Thread David Mobley
Hi, I just have a couple of things i want to clarify about the constrain distances i used. The distance I used to pull the ligand and receptor apart was a non-bonded distance between the amide nitrogen of the ligand and the oxygen carbonyl of the receptor (on both ends). looking at the

Re: [gmx-users] Re: question about free energy. Gromacs user

2007-08-10 Thread bmmothan
Thank you David and Arneh for the comments. I just have a couple of things i want to clarify about the constrain distances i used. The distance I used to pull the ligand and receptor apart was a non-bonded distance between the amide nitrogen of the ligand and the oxygen carbonyl of the receptor

[gmx-users] Re: question about free energy. Gromacs user

2007-08-09 Thread David Mobley
Hi, I have been reading your work about free energy calculations and it is impressive. I want to estimate binding free energy for a ligand/receptor complex and I would appreciate your valuable input on how to approach the system I am using. It is the first time I attempt free energy

Re: [gmx-users] Re: question about free energy. Gromacs user

2007-08-09 Thread Arneh Babakhani
Maybe it should be obvious, but (a) why are you constraining two distances, and (b) are you sure your constraints aren't going to muck with the internal degrees of freedom for the ligand? I would think one would like to pull the ligand out of the receptor along some particular direction,