ReviewChemical science2021
Computational and data driven molecular material design assisted by low scaling quantum mechanics calculations and machine learning.
Review in Chemical science, 2021. 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, 49 citations in OpenAlex.
- Soft Computing Approaches toward Density-Based Analysis of Many-Electron Systems.ACS physical chemistry Au · 2026Review
- Assessing the performance of quantum-mechanical descriptors in physicochemical and biological property prediction.Digital discovery · 2026Article
- From Apo to Ligand-Bound: Unraveling PPARγ-LBD Conformational Shifts via Advanced Molecular Dynamics.ACS omega · 2025Article
- Confining He Atoms in Diverse Ice-Phases: Examining the Stability of He Hydrate Crystals through DFT Approaches.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Design, synthesis, and application of some two-dimensional materials.Chemical science · 2023Review
- A transfer learning approach for reaction discovery in small data situations using generative model.iScience · 2022Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electronic structure methods based on quantum mechanics (QM) are widely employed in the computational predictions of the molecular properties and optoelectronic properties of molecular materials. The computational costs of these QM methods, ranging from density functional theory (DFT) or time-dependent DFT (TDDFT) to wave-function theory (WFT), usually increase sharply with the system size, causing the curse of dimensionality and hindering the QM calculations for large sized systems such as long polymer oligomers and complex molecular aggregates. In such cases, in recent years low scaling QM methods and machine learning (ML) techniques have been adopted to reduce the computational costs and thus assist computational and data driven molecular material design. In this review, we illustrated low scaling ground-state and excited-state QM approaches and their applications to long oligomers, self-assembled supramolecular complexes, stimuli-responsive materials, mechanically interlocked molecules, and excited state processes in molecular aggregates. Variable electrostatic parameters were also introduced in the modified force fields with the polarization model. On the basis of QM computational or experimental datasets, several ML algorithms, including explainable models, deep learning, and on-line learning methods, have been employed to predict the molecular energies, forces, electronic structure properties, and optical or electrical properties of materials. It can be conceived that low scaling algorithms with periodic boundary conditions are expected to be further applicable to functional materials, perhaps in combination with machine learning to fast predict the lattice energy, crystal structures, and spectroscopic properties of periodic functional materials.
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.