Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21370970›Full record

ReviewAnnual review of biophysics2011

Equilibrium sampling in biomolecular simulations.

Daniel M Zuckerman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annual review of biophysics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 87 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
87citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

87 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Predicting Biomolecular Binding Kinetics: A Review.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2023
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Accelerators for Classical Molecular Dynamics Simulations of Biomolecules.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2022
    Review
  16. Article
  17. In-Silico Selection of Aptamer Targeting SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

27 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Daniel M ZuckermanDepartment of Computational and Systems Biology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA. ddmmzz@pitt.edu

Funding

Toward Practical, Rigorous Binding Affinity CalculationsR01GM076569 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI ZUCKERMAN, DANIEL M · 2007 to 2011
$1.0M
NIGMS NIH HHS GM076569NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM076569
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Equilibrium sampling of biomolecules remains an unmet challenge after more than 30 years of atomistic simulation. Efforts to enhance sampling capability, which are reviewed here, range from the development of new algorithms to parallelization to novel uses of hardware. Special focus is placed on classifying algorithms--most of which are underpinned by a few key ideas--in order to understand their fundamental strengths and limitations. Although algorithms have proliferated, progress resulting from novel hardware use appears to be more clear-cut than from algorithms alone, due partly to the lack of widely used sampling measures.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsModels, BiologicalModels, ChemicalAnimalsBiopolymersComputer SimulationHumansModels, StatisticalSample SizeThermodynamicsBiopolymers

Identifiers

PMID21370970
PMCPMC4434601

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.