ArticleThe Journal of chemical physics2016
Determining polarizable force fields with electrostatic potentials from quantum mechanical linear response theory.
Article in The Journal of chemical physics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep Neural Network Model to Predict the Electrostatic Parameters in the Polarizable Classical Drude Oscillator Force Field.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2022Article
- Predicting partition coefficients of drug-like molecules in the SAMPL6 challenge with Drude polarizable force fields.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2020Article
- Polarizable Force Fields for Biomolecular Simulations: Recent Advances and Applications.Annual review of biophysics · 2019Review
- Toward Building Protein Force Fields by Residue-Based Systematic Molecular Fragmentation and Neural Network.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2019Article
- Mapping the Drude polarizable force field onto a multipole and induced dipole model.The Journal of chemical physics · 2017Article
- An Estimation of Hybrid Quantum Mechanical Molecular Mechanical Polarization Energies for Small Molecules Using Polarizable Force-Field Approaches.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We developed a new method to calculate the atomic polarizabilities by fitting to the electrostatic potentials (ESPs) obtained from quantum mechanical (QM) calculations within the linear response theory. This parallels the conventional approach of fitting atomic charges based on electrostatic potentials from the electron density. Our ESP fitting is combined with the induced dipole model under the perturbation of uniform external electric fields of all orientations. QM calculations for the linear response to the external electric fields are used as input, fully consistent with the induced dipole model, which itself is a linear response model. The orientation of the uniform external electric fields is integrated in all directions. The integration of orientation and QM linear response calculations together makes the fitting results independent of the orientations and magnitudes of the uniform external electric fields applied. Another advantage of our method is that QM calculation is only needed once, in contrast to the conventional approach, where many QM calculations are needed for many different applied electric fields. The molecular polarizabilities obtained from our method show comparable accuracy with those from fitting directly to the experimental or theoretical molecular polarizabilities. Since ESP is directly fitted, atomic polarizabilities obtained from our method are expected to reproduce the electrostatic interactions better. Our method was used to calculate both transferable atomic polarizabilities for polarizable molecular mechanics' force fields and nontransferable molecule-specific atomic polarizabilities.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.