What is the best simulation approach for measuring local density fluctuations near solvo-/hydrophobes?

Nigel B. Wilding, Robert Evans, Francesco Turci
{"title":"What is the best simulation approach for measuring local density fluctuations near solvo-/hydrophobes?","authors":"Nigel B. Wilding, Robert Evans, Francesco Turci","doi":"10.1063/5.0203088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Measurements of local density fluctuations are crucial to characterizing the interfacial properties of equilibrium fluids. A specific case that has been well-explored involves the heightened compressibility of water near hydrophobic entities. Commonly, a spatial profile of local fluctuation strength is constructed from the measurements of the mean and variance of solvent particle number fluctuations in a set of contiguous subvolumes of the system adjacent to the solvo-/hydrophobe. An alternative measure proposed by Evans and Stewart [J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 27, 194111 (2015)] defines a local compressibility profile in terms of the chemical potential derivative of the spatial number density profile. Using Grand canonical Monte Carlo simulation, we compare and contrast the efficacy of these two approaches for a Lennard-Jones solvent at spherical and planar solvophobic interfaces and SPC/E water at a hydrophobic spherical solute. Our principal findings are as follows: (i) the local compressibility profile χ(r) of Evans and Stewart is considerably more sensitive to variations in the strength of local density fluctuations than the spatial fluctuation profile F(r) and can resolve much more detailed structure; and (ii) while the local compressibility profile is essentially independent of the choice of spatial discretization used to construct the profile, the spatial fluctuation profile exhibits a strong systematic dependence on the size of the subvolumes on which the profile is defined. We clarify the origin and nature of this finite-size effect.","PeriodicalId":501648,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Chemical Physics","volume":"86 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Chemical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0203088","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Measurements of local density fluctuations are crucial to characterizing the interfacial properties of equilibrium fluids. A specific case that has been well-explored involves the heightened compressibility of water near hydrophobic entities. Commonly, a spatial profile of local fluctuation strength is constructed from the measurements of the mean and variance of solvent particle number fluctuations in a set of contiguous subvolumes of the system adjacent to the solvo-/hydrophobe. An alternative measure proposed by Evans and Stewart [J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 27, 194111 (2015)] defines a local compressibility profile in terms of the chemical potential derivative of the spatial number density profile. Using Grand canonical Monte Carlo simulation, we compare and contrast the efficacy of these two approaches for a Lennard-Jones solvent at spherical and planar solvophobic interfaces and SPC/E water at a hydrophobic spherical solute. Our principal findings are as follows: (i) the local compressibility profile χ(r) of Evans and Stewart is considerably more sensitive to variations in the strength of local density fluctuations than the spatial fluctuation profile F(r) and can resolve much more detailed structure; and (ii) while the local compressibility profile is essentially independent of the choice of spatial discretization used to construct the profile, the spatial fluctuation profile exhibits a strong systematic dependence on the size of the subvolumes on which the profile is defined. We clarify the origin and nature of this finite-size effect.
什么是测量溶解/吸水器附近局部密度波动的最佳模拟方法?
测量局部密度波动对于描述平衡流体的界面特性至关重要。疏水性实体附近水的可压缩性增强是一个已被深入探讨的具体案例。通常情况下,局部波动强度的空间轮廓是通过测量溶解/疏水体邻近的一组连续系统子体积中溶剂粒子数波动的均值和方差来构建的。埃文斯和斯图尔特提出的另一种测量方法[J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 27, 194111 (2015)]根据空间数量密度曲线的化学势导数定义了局部可压缩性曲线。利用大规范蒙特卡罗模拟,我们比较并对比了这两种方法对球形和平面疏溶性界面上的伦纳德-琼斯溶剂以及疏水性球形溶质上的 SPC/E 水的功效。我们的主要发现如下(i) Evans 和 Stewart 的局部可压缩性剖面 χ(r)比空间波动剖面 F(r)对局部密度波动强度的变化更为敏感,并且可以解析更为详细的结构;(ii) 虽然局部可压缩性剖面基本上与用于构建剖面的空间离散化的选择无关,但空间波动剖面对定义剖面的子卷的大小表现出强烈的系统依赖性。我们澄清了这种有限尺寸效应的起源和性质。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信