Shirts Michael R, Pande Vijay S
Department of Chemistry, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305-5080, USA.
J Chem Phys. 2005 Apr 8;122(14):144107. doi: 10.1063/1.1873592.
Recent work has demonstrated the Bennett acceptance ratio method is the best asymptotically unbiased method for determining the equilibrium free energy between two end states given work distributions collected from either equilibrium and nonequilibrium data. However, it is still not clear what the practical advantage of this acceptance ratio method is over other common methods in atomistic simulations. In this study, we first review theoretical estimates of the bias and variance of exponential averaging (EXP), thermodynamic integration (TI), and the Bennett acceptance ratio (BAR). In the process, we present a new simple scheme for computing the variance and bias of many estimators, and demonstrate the connections between BAR and the weighted histogram analysis method. Next, a series of analytically solvable toy problems is examined to shed more light on the relative performance in terms of the bias and efficiency of these three methods. Interestingly, it is impossible to conclusively identify a "best" method for calculating the free energy, as each of the three methods performs more efficiently than the others in at least one situation examined in these toy problems. Finally, sample problems of the insertion/deletion of both a Lennard-Jones particle and a much larger molecule in TIP3P water are examined by these three methods. In all tests of atomistic systems, free energies obtained with BAR have significantly lower bias and smaller variance than when using EXP or TI, especially when the overlap in phase space between end states is small. For example, BAR can extract as much information from multiple fast, far-from-equilibrium simulations as from fewer simulations near equilibrium, which EXP cannot. Although TI and sometimes even EXP can be somewhat more efficient in idealized toy problems, in the realistic atomistic situations tested in this paper, BAR is significantly more efficient than all other methods.
近期的研究表明,对于根据从平衡态和非平衡态数据收集的功分布来确定两个终态之间的平衡自由能而言,贝内特接受率方法是最佳的渐近无偏方法。然而,在原子模拟中,这种接受率方法相对于其他常用方法的实际优势仍不明确。在本研究中,我们首先回顾指数平均(EXP)、热力学积分(TI)和贝内特接受率(BAR)的偏差和方差的理论估计。在此过程中,我们提出了一种计算许多估计量的方差和偏差的新的简单方案,并展示了BAR与加权直方图分析方法之间的联系。接下来,研究了一系列可解析求解的简单问题,以更清楚地了解这三种方法在偏差和效率方面的相对性能。有趣的是,无法确凿地确定一种“最佳”的自由能计算方法,因为在这些简单问题所考察的至少一种情况下,这三种方法中的每一种都比其他方法表现得更高效。最后,用这三种方法研究了在TIP3P水中插入/删除一个 Lennard-Jones粒子和一个大得多的分子的示例问题。在所有原子系统测试中,与使用EXP或TI时相比,用BAR获得的自由能具有显著更低的偏差和更小的方差,特别是当终态之间的相空间重叠较小时。例如,BAR可以从多个快速、远离平衡的模拟中提取与从较少的接近平衡的模拟中一样多的信息,而EXP则不能。尽管在理想化的简单问题中TI甚至有时EXP可能会更高效一些,但在本文测试的实际原子情况中,BAR比所有其他方法都显著更高效。