# Relative constraint deviation after LINCS

**URL:** <https://ask.bioexcel.eu/t/relative-constraint-deviation-after-lincs/2496>\
**Category:** pmx\
**Created:** [October 5, 2020, 10:54pm UTC](https://ask.bioexcel.eu/t/relative-constraint-deviation-after-lincs/2496 "2020-10-05T22:54:45Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![vgapsys](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/7993a0/32.png) [@vgapsys](https://ask.bioexcel.eu/u/vgapsys)\
**Post date:** [October 9, 2020, 3:32pm UTC](https://ask.bioexcel.eu/t/relative-constraint-deviation-after-lincs/2496/3 "2020-10-09T15:32:16Z")

</div>

Switching to h-bond constraints is likely incorrect for the pmx based ligand hybrid topologies. In case, a hydrogen atom is mapped to a dummy in stateA, the constraint will not be generated for the bonds involving this dummy.

I would suggest trying an SD integrator (note that you need to change tau-t in this case).

---

_[View the full topic](https://ask.bioexcel.eu/t/relative-constraint-deviation-after-lincs/2496)._