The "optimised" adaptive protocol produced extremely similar results to the long time 30 ns and manually-optimised 6 ns non-adaptive protocols (Table ). This was despite using over 3 times less GPU time than the 6 ns protocol, over 14 times less than the 30 ns protocol (Table ), and requiring no manual tweaking of the equilibration times of λ-schedules. We equilibration times would be required for MIF and PDE2a. Identifying the requirement for such long equilibration times would be time-consuming; alternatively, uniformly applying very long equilibration times would be wasteful. In contrast, the adaptive procedure only discards data to equilibration for the problematic MIF and PDE2a systems (Figure ). This suggests inherent advantages to the automated, adaptive protocol even when the total computational cost is equivalent.