From chemistry-request@server.ccl.net Thu Jan  2 20:13:15 2003
Received: from TheWorld.com ([199.172.62.103])
	by server.ccl.net (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id h031DF913206
	for <chemistry@ccl.net>; Thu, 2 Jan 2003 20:13:15 -0500
Received: from vaio.theworld.com (1Cust221.tnt12.bos10.da.uu.net [63.17.121.221])
	by TheWorld.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA04363
	for <chemistry@ccl.net>; Thu, 2 Jan 2003 20:13:10 -0500
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.1.20030102202556.026005d0@pop.theworld.com>
X-Sender: jle@pop.theworld.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 20:27:24 -0500
To: chemistry@ccl.net
From: Joe Leonard <jle@theworld.com>
Subject: Single vs. Double precision/forcefields
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

Folks,

Has anybody done, or does anybody have pointers to a study
on the effect of precision on forcefield energies and/or gradients?
This would be most interesting on Intel and/or AMD chipsets
(which seem to prefer single-precision up through P-III's)...

Note to language bigots, please replace single/double precision
with float/doubles as necessary :-).

Happy new year to all!

Joe

P.S. I would also be interested in learning of any groups doing
work on internal data representations of chemical entites, and
how this would relate to how codes are written in the future...