ArticleThe journal of physical chemistry. A2019
Analysis of Density Functional Tight Binding with Natural Bonding Orbitals.
Article in The journal of physical chemistry. A, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Atomistic Simulations Decode the Mechanisms of DNA and RNA Processing Enzymes: Function through Motion.Accounts of chemical research · 2026Article
- AABBA Graph Kernel: Atom-Atom, Bond-Bond, and Bond-Atom Autocorrelations for Machine Learning.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2024Article
- A Comparative XPS, UV PES, NEXAFS, and DFT Study of the Electronic Structure of the Salen Ligand in the HInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Biomolecular QM/MM Simulations: What Are Some of the "Burning Issues"?The journal of physical chemistry. B · 2021Article
- Improvement of d-d interactions in density functional tight binding for transition metal ions with a ligand field model: assessment of a DFTB3+Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The description of chemical bonding by the density functional tight binding (DFTB) model is analyzed using natural bonding orbitals (NBOs) and compared to results from density functional theory (B3LYP/aug-cc-pVTZ) calculations. Several molecular systems have been chosen to represent fairly diverse bonding scenarios that include standard covalent bonds, hypervalent interactions, multicenter bonds, metal-ligand interactions (with and without the pseudo-Jahn-Teller effect), and through-space donor-acceptor interactions. Overall, the results suggest that DFTB3/3OB provides physically sound descriptions for the different bonding scenarios analyzed here, as reflected by the general agreement between DFTB3 and B3LYP NBO properties, such as the nature of the NBOs, the magnitudes of natural charges and bond orders, and the dominant donor-acceptor interactions. The degree of ligand-to-metal charge transfer and the ionic nature of pentavalent phosphate are overestimated, likely reflecting the minimal-basis nature of DFTB3/3OB. Moreover, certain orbital interactions, such as geminal interactions, are observed to be grossly overestimated by DFTB3 for hypervalent phosphate and several transition metal compounds that involve copper and nickel. The study indicates that results from NBO analysis can be instructive for identifying electronic structure descriptions at the approximate quantum-mechanical level that require improvement and thus for guiding the systematic improvement of these methods.
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.