# Interpretating of WHAM and PMF

**URL:** <https://gromacs.bioexcel.eu/t/interpretating-of-wham-and-pmf/8940>\
**Category:** User discussions\
**Created:** [April 21, 2024, 10:10am UTC](https://gromacs.bioexcel.eu/t/interpretating-of-wham-and-pmf/8940 "2024-04-21T10:10:58Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![MagnusL](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex017/user_avatar/gromacs.bioexcel.eu/magnusl/32/2380_2.png) [@MagnusL](https://gromacs.bioexcel.eu/u/MagnusL)\
**Post date:** [April 22, 2024, 6:53am UTC](https://gromacs.bioexcel.eu/t/interpretating-of-wham-and-pmf/8940/2 "2024-04-22T06:53:19Z")

</div>

Please, don’t start multiple threads with the same questions ([Interpretation of wham and pmf](https://gromacs.bioexcel.eu/t/interpretation-of-wham-and-pmf/8939)).

You seem to have a reasonable umbrella overlap, I think that is about as much as can be said about the output. I would perhaps consider adding more umbrella windows at approximately 0.95, 1.6, 1.9 and 4.55, since the overlap there is quite limited.

Regarding the PMF, it’s not possible to say if it’s correct or not. You are the domain expert. Does it look good to you? What are the error estimates? When doing the analysis, does the PMF look the same if you discard the first 1/2 of the data? The last 1/4? Otherwise, that may be an indication (but far from a fool-proof test) that you need to increase your simulation time.

---

_[View the full topic](https://gromacs.bioexcel.eu/t/interpretating-of-wham-and-pmf/8940)._