Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38149593›Full record

ArticleJournal of chemical theory and computation2024

Improving the Accuracy of Physics-Based Hydration-Free Energy Predictions by Machine Learning the Remaining Error Relative to the Experiment.

Lewis Bass, Luke H Elder, Dan E Folescu, Negin Forouzesh, Igor S Tolokh, Anuj Karpatne, Alexey V Onufriev

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of chemical theory and computation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

7 authors.

Lewis BassDepartment of Computer Engineering, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061, United States.
Luke H ElderDepartment of Computer Science, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061, United States.
Dan E FolescuDepartment of Computer Science, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061, United States.
Negin ForouzeshDepartment of Computer Science, California State University, Los Angeles, California 90032, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-2293-0391
Igor S TolokhDepartment of Computer Science, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061, United States.
Anuj KarpatneDepartment of Computer Science, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061, United States.
Alexey V OnufrievDepartment of Computer Science, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4930-6612

Funding

Next generation implicit solvation for atomistic modelingR01GM144596 · NIGMS · VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INST AND ST UNIV · PI ONUFRIEV, ALEXEY VLAD · 2022 to 2025
$1.2M
Improving the Accuracy of Implicit Solvents with a Physics-Guided Neural NetworkR16GM146633 · NIGMS · CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY LOS ANGELES · PI FOROUZESH, NEGIN · 2022 to 2025
$755k
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM144596NIGMS NIH HHS R16 GM146633
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The accuracy of computational models of water is key to atomistic simulations of biomolecules. We propose a computationally efficient way to improve the accuracy of the prediction of hydration-free energies (HFEs) of small molecules: the remaining errors of the physics-based models relative to the experiment are predicted and mitigated by machine learning (ML) as a postprocessing step. Specifically, the trained graph convolutional neural network attempts to identify the "blind spots" in the physics-based model predictions, where the complex physics of aqueous solvation is poorly accounted for, and partially corrects for them. The strategy is explored for five classical solvent models representing various accuracy/speed trade-offs, from the fast analytical generalized Born (GB) to the popular TIP3P explicit solvent model; experimental HFEs of small neutral molecules from the FreeSolv set are used for the training and testing. For all of the models, the ML correction reduces the resulting root-mean-square error relative to the experiment for HFEs of small molecules, without significant overfitting and with negligible computational overhead. For example, on the test set, the relative accuracy improvement is 47% for the fast analytical GB, making it, after the ML correction, almost as accurate as uncorrected TIP3P. For the TIP3P model, the accuracy improvement is about 39%, bringing the ML-corrected model's accuracy below the 1 kcal/mol threshold. In general, the relative benefit of the ML corrections is smaller for more accurate physics-based models, reaching the lower limit of about 20% relative accuracy gain compared with that of the physics-based treatment alone. The proposed strategy of using ML to learn the remaining error of physics-based models offers a distinct advantage over training ML alone directly on reference HFEs: it preserves the correct overall trend, even well outside of the training set.

Identifiers

PMID38149593
PMCPMC10950260

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.