ArticlePhysical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP2020
How accurate are approximate quantum chemical methods at modelling solute-solvent interactions in solvated clusters?
Article in Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP, 2020. 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.
- Accurate density functional theory for noncovalent interactions in charged systems.Science advances · 2026Article
- Phenomenological description of the acidity of the citric acid and its deprotonated species: informational-theoretical study.Journal of molecular modeling · 2023Article
- Ionization Energies and Redox Potentials of Hydrated Transition Metal Ions: Evaluation of Domain-Based Local Pair Natural Orbital Coupled Cluster Approaches.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2022Article
- Connecting Gas-Phase Computational Chemistry to Condensed Phase Kinetic Modeling: The State-of-the-Art.Polymers · 2021Review
- Quantum Chemical Microsolvation by Automated Water Placement.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Data-Driven Strategies for Accelerated Materials Design.Accounts of chemical research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In this paper, the performance of a wide range of DFT methods is assessed for the calculation of interaction energies of thermal clusters of a solute in water. Three different charge states (neutral, proton transfer transition state and zwitterion) of glycine were solvated by 1 to 40 water molecules as sampled from molecular dynamics simulations. While some ab initio composite methods that employ insufficiently large basis sets incurred significant errors even for a cluster containing only 5 water molecules relative to the W1X-2 benchmark, the DLPNO-CCSD(T)/CBS and DSD-PBEP86 (triple zeta basis set) levels of theory predicted very accurate interaction energies. These levels of theory were used to benchmark the performance of 16 density functionals from different rungs of Jacob's Ladder. Of the Rung 4 functionals examined, the ωB97M-V and ωB97X-V functionals stood out for predicting absolute interaction energies in 40-water clusters with mean absolute deviations (MAD) ∼4 kJ mol-1. The B3LYP-D3(BJ) functional performed exceptionally well with a MAD ∼1.7 kJ mol-1 and is the overall best performing method. Calculations of relative interaction energies allow for cancellation of systematic errors, including basis set truncation and superposition errors, and the ωB97M-V and B3LYP-D3(BJ) double zeta basis set calculations yielded relative interaction energies that are within ∼3 kJ mol-1 of the benchmark. The ONIOM approximation provides another strategy for accelerating the calculation of accurate absolute interaction energies provided that the calculations have converged with respect to the size of the "high-level-layer".
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.