ArticleJournal of chemical information and modeling2024
Optimal Dielectric Boundary for Binding Free Energy Estimates in the Implicit Solvent.
Article in Journal of chemical information and modeling, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Accuracy of binding free energy calculations utilizing implicit solvent models is critically affected by parameters of the underlying dielectric boundary, specifically, the atomic and water probe radii. Here, a multidimensional optimization pipeline is used to find optimal atomic radii, specifically for binding calculations in the implicit solvent. To reduce overfitting, the optimization target includes separate, weighted contributions from both binding and hydration free energies. The resulting five-parameter radii set, OPT_BIND5D, is evaluated against experiment for binding free energies of 20 host-guest (H-G) systems, unrelated to the types of structures used in the training. The resulting accuracy for this H-G test set (root mean square error of 2.03 kcal/mol, mean signed error of -0.13 kcal/mol, mean absolute error of 1.68 kcal/mol, and Pearson's correlation of
Indexed as
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.