Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

wild/unminimized hydrogen placement #162

Closed
nitroamos opened this issue Apr 17, 2018 · 5 comments
Closed

wild/unminimized hydrogen placement #162

nitroamos opened this issue Apr 17, 2018 · 5 comments

Comments

@nitroamos
Copy link

Hi, I'm trying to run PDBFixer on 2x2v. I think I'm using the latest of OpenMM and PDBFixer. I downloaded a fresh pdb from rcsb and then ran this script (as recommended by your manual):

print("\nOpening",args.pdb.name)
if args.pdb.name.endswith(".cif"):
   fixer = PDBFixer(pdbxfile=args.pdb)
else:
   fixer = PDBFixer(filename=args.pdb.name)

fixer.findMissingResidues()
fixer.findNonstandardResidues()
fixer.replaceNonstandardResidues()
fixer.removeHeterogens(True)
fixer.findMissingAtoms()
fixer.addMissingAtoms()
fixer.addMissingHydrogens(7.0)
PDBFile.writeFile(fixer.topology, fixer.positions, open('output.pdb', 'w'))

sometimes hydrogen placement appears ok, other times it's wild, e.g. (full pdb below):

REMARK   1 CREATED WITH OPENMM 7.2.1, 2018-04-17
CRYST1   74.180   97.340  117.255  90.00  90.00  90.00 P 1           1 
ATOM      1  N   MET A   1      34.088 -25.409   2.687  1.00  0.00           N  
ATOM      2  H   MET A   1     165.619 246.377-245.653  1.00  0.00           H  
ATOM      3  H2  MET A   1     -95.455-303.419 239.889  1.00  0.00           H  
ATOM      4  H3  MET A   1      34.335 -21.088  13.490  1.00  0.00           H  
ATOM      5  CA  MET A   1      33.627 -24.102   3.121  1.00  0.00           C  
ATOM      6  HA  MET A   1      33.810 -23.673   4.010  1.00  0.00           H  
ATOM      7  CB  MET A   1      34.264 -23.025   2.252  1.00  0.00           C  
ATOM      8  HB2 MET A   1      34.298 -23.177   1.076  1.00  0.00           H  
ATOM      9  HB3 MET A   1      35.148 -22.421   1.742  1.00  0.00           H  
ATOM     10  CG  MET A   1      34.834 -21.888   3.102  1.00  0.00           C  
ATOM     11  HG2 MET A   1      34.529 -20.941   3.417  1.00  0.00           H  
ATOM     12  HG3 MET A   1      34.996 -20.894   2.829  1.00  0.00           H  
ATOM     13  SD  MET A   1      35.946 -22.446   4.355  1.00  0.00           S  
ATOM     14  CE  MET A   1      36.224 -21.138   5.502  1.00  0.00           C  
ATOM     15  HE1 MET A   1    -585.240-641.834-615.669  1.00  0.00           H  
ATOM     16  HE2 MET A   1    -578.859 599.985 626.635  1.00  0.00           H  
ATOM     17  HE3 MET A   1      22.417 -17.340   9.046  1.00  0.00           H  

If it matters, I think the machine I'm running on has a GPU (based on a stack trace I saw from PDBFixer on this system when adding a membrane).

Any ideas on what I might try?

output.pdb.tar.gz

@peastman
Copy link
Member

This might be related to openmm/openmm#2025. I was never able to reproduce it in that case, but maybe I'll be able to with your files.

@nitroamos
Copy link
Author

it's not consistent, you may have to try a couple times...

also, since there's a random number generator involved, you might consider (if practical) exposing the seed as a parameter. not sure how portable that would be, but it might help with debugging.

@peastman
Copy link
Member

I tried four times, but wasn't able to reproduce the problem. It sounds like something is going wrong in the energy minimization step.

You said yesterday in #163 you had installed the latest dev build. By any chance did that fix this problem? I recently made some changes to make energy minimization a bit more robust, so it's possible that's why I'm not seeing it.

@nitroamos
Copy link
Author

Yes, I wrote up this issue before switching to the dev branch. I've run the test many times now and haven't seen a problem (and even did a switch back to prod for positive control) so I think you fixed it. Thanks!

@peastman
Copy link
Member

Great! For future reference, this is the change that I think probably fixed it: openmm/openmm#1984

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants