Skip to main content
Log in

Stable algorithm for event detection in event-driven particle dynamics: logical states

  • Published:
Computational Particle Mechanics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 27 April 2016

Abstract

Following the recent development of a stable event-detection algorithm for hard-sphere systems, the implications of more complex interaction models are examined. The relative location of particles leads to ambiguity when it is used to determine the interaction state of a particle in stepped potentials, such as the square-well model. To correctly predict the next event in these systems, the concept of an additional state that is tracked separately from the particle position is introduced and integrated into the stable algorithm for event detection.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alder BJ, Wainwright TE (1959) Studies in molecular dynamics. 1. General method. J Chem Phys 31(2):459–466. doi:10.1063/1.1730376

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Bannerman MN, Lue L, Woodcock LV (2010) Thermodynamic pressures for hard spheres and closed-virial equation-of-state. J Chem Phys 132:084,507. doi:10.1063/1.3328823

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bannerman MN, Sargant R, Lue L (2011) Dynamo: A free O(N) general event-driven simulator. J Comp Chem 32:3329–3338. doi:10.1002/jcc.21915

  4. Bannerman MN, Strobl S, Formella A, Pöschel T (2014) Stable algorithm for event detection in event-driven particle dynamics. Comp Part Mech 1:1–2. doi:10.1007/s40571-014-0021-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Frenkel D, Maguire JF (1983) Molecular dynamics study of the dynamical properties of an assembly of infinitely thin hard rods. Mol Phys 49(3):503–541. doi:10.1080/00268978300101331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Marín M, Risso D, Cordero P (1993) Efficient algorithms for many-body hard particle molecular-dynamics. J Comput Phys 109(2):306–317. doi:10.1006/jcph.1993.1219

  7. Pöschel T, Schwager T (2005) Computational granular dynamics. Springer, Berlin. doi:10.1007/3-540-27720-X

    Google Scholar 

  8. Rapaport DC (1980) Event scheduling problem in molecular dynamics simulation. J Comput Phys 34(2):184–201. doi:10.1016/0021-9991(80)90104-7

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Schultz AJ, Kofke DA (2015) Etomica: an object-oriented framework for molecular simulation. J Comput Chem 36(8):573–583. doi:10.1002/jcc.23823

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Thomson C, Lue L, Bannerman MN (2014) Mapping continuous potentials to discrete forms. J Chem Phys 140:034,105. doi:10.1063/1.4861669

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the German Research Foundation (DFG) through the Cluster of Excellence ‘Engineering of Advanced Materials’ at the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg and through Grant Po 472/25.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Severin Strobl.

Appendix 1: Stable algorithm for square-well molecules

Appendix 1: Stable algorithm for square-well molecules

The calculation of the event times in Sect. 3 is expressed in terms of the ball–ball overlap function, \(f_\text {BB}\), as given in Eq. 1. This operation is especially sensitive to round-off error in the floating-point representation, therefore two numerically robust subroutines which analyse \(f_\text {BB}\) are presented here. Both use the quadratic equation to solve for the roots of \(f_\text {BB}\); however, each has different safeguards against numerical errors. The first algorithm, BallBallIntersectionTime (Algorithm 1), calculates the time until two balls begin to intersect. The second, BallBallDisjointTime (Algorithm 2), calculates the time until two balls become disjoint. Both subroutines return \(+\infty \) if no event is detected and use the appropriate numerically stable form of the quadratic equation.

figure a
figure b

The introduction of the logical state and the overlap function requires some changes to the detection of events as outlined in step 2 of the basic algorithm given in Sect. 2. The modified algorithm is presented in SWEventTime (Algorithm 3). The logical state is required as input to this function and must be tracked seperately. For the square-well model, this is a single Boolean value per particle pair indicating whether the particles are captured or not. The specialized routines of Algorithms 1 and 2 are then used to determine the roots of the overlap function. In the case of a captured particle pair, both discontinuities at \(\sigma _1\) and \(\sigma _2\) are accessible and the minimum of the respective event times has to be selected.

figure c

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Strobl, S., Bannerman, M.N. & Pöschel, T. Stable algorithm for event detection in event-driven particle dynamics: logical states. Comp. Part. Mech. 3, 383–388 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40571-016-0106-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40571-016-0106-7

Keywords

Navigation