Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22241968›Full record

ArticleJournal of chemical theory and computation2012

Force Field Benchmark of Organic Liquids: Density, Enthalpy of Vaporization, Heat Capacities, Surface Tension, Isothermal Compressibility, Volumetric Expansion Coefficient, and Dielectric Constant.

Carl Caleman, Paul J van Maaren, Minyan Hong, Jochen S Hub, Luciano T Costa, David van der Spoel

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of chemical theory and computation, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 130 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
130citing papers in PubMed
11.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

130 citing papers in PubMed, 746 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Deciphering Concentration and Backbone Identity Effects on the Redox Properties of Phthalimide-Based Polymers.Chemistry of materials : a publication of the American Chemical Society · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

70 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Carl Caleman
Paul J van Maaren
Minyan Hong
Jochen S Hub
Luciano T Costa
David van der Spoel
Uppsala University · SECenter for Free-Electron Laser Science · DEUniversidade Federal de Alfenas · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The chemical composition of small organic molecules is often very similar to amino acid side chains or the bases in nucleic acids, and hence there is no a priori reason why a molecular mechanics force field could not describe both organic liquids and biomolecules with a single parameter set. Here, we devise a benchmark for force fields in order to test the ability of existing force fields to reproduce some key properties of organic liquids, namely, the density, enthalpy of vaporization, the surface tension, the heat capacity at constant volume and pressure, the isothermal compressibility, the volumetric expansion coefficient, and the static dielectric constant. Well over 1200 experimental measurements were used for comparison to the simulations of 146 organic liquids. Novel polynomial interpolations of the dielectric constant (32 molecules), heat capacity at constant pressure (three molecules), and the isothermal compressibility (53 molecules) as a function of the temperature have been made, based on experimental data, in order to be able to compare simulation results to them. To compute the heat capacities, we applied the two phase thermodynamics method (Lin et al. J. Chem. Phys.2003, 119, 11792), which allows one to compute thermodynamic properties on the basis of the density of states as derived from the velocity autocorrelation function. The method is implemented in a new utility within the GROMACS molecular simulation package, named g_dos, and a detailed exposé of the underlying equations is presented. The purpose of this work is to establish the state of the art of two popular force fields, OPLS/AA (all-atom optimized potential for liquid simulation) and GAFF (generalized Amber force field), to find common bottlenecks, i.e., particularly difficult molecules, and to serve as a reference point for future force field development. To make for a fair playing field, all molecules were evaluated with the same parameter settings, such as thermostats and barostats, treatment of electrostatic interactions, and system size (1000 molecules). The densities and enthalpy of vaporization from an independent data set based on simulations using the CHARMM General Force Field (CGenFF) presented by Vanommeslaeghe et al. (J. Comput. Chem.2010, 31, 671) are included for comparison. We find that, overall, the OPLS/AA force field performs somewhat better than GAFF, but there are significant issues with reproduction of the surface tension and dielectric constants for both force fields.

Identifiers

PMID22241968
PMCPMC3254193
OpenAlexW2058938611

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.