ArticleThe journal of physical chemistry. A2025
The "Bubblepole" (BUPO) Method for Linear-Scaling Coulomb Matrix Construction with or without Density Fitting.
Article in The journal of physical chemistry. A, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Formulation of an EfficientJournal of chemical theory and computation · 2026Article
- Response of a General Restricted Open-Shell Hartree-Fock Wave Function. I: Formalism, Analytic Gradients, and Electric and Magnetic Response Properties.The journal of physical chemistry. A · 2025Article
- Hybrid DFT Quality Thermochemistry and Environment Effects at GGA Cost via Local Quantum Embedding.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2025Article
- Improving the Efficiency of Electrostatic Embedding Using the Fast Multipole Method.Journal of computational chemistry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this work, we describe the development of a new algorithm for the computation of Coulomb-type matrices using the well-known resolution of the identity (RI) or density fitting (DF) approximation. The method is linear-scaling with respect to system size and computationally highly efficient. For small molecules, it performs almost as well as the Split-RI-J algorithm (which might be the most efficient RI-J implementation to date), while outperforming it for larger systems with about 300 or more atoms. The method achieves linear scaling through multipole approximations and a hierarchical treatment of multipoles. However, unlike in the fast multipole method (FMM), the algorithm does not use a hierarchical boxing algorithm. Rather, close-lying objects like auxiliary basis shells and basis set shell pairs are grouped together in spheres that enclose the set of objects completely, which includes a new definition of the shell-pair extent that defines a real-space radius outside of which a given shell pair can be safely assumed to be negligible. We refer to these spheres as "bubbles" and therefore refer to the algorithm as the "Bubblepole" (BUPO) algorithm, with the acronym being RI-BUPO-J. The bubbles are constructed in a way to contain a nearly constant number of objects such that a very even workload arises. The hierarchical bubble structure adapts itself to the molecular topology and geometry. For any target object (shell pair or auxiliary shell), one might envision that the bubbles "carve" out what might be referred to as a "far-field surface". Using the default settings determined in this work, we demonstrate that the algorithm reaches submicro-Eh and even nano-Eh accuracy in the total Coulomb energy for systems as large as 700 atoms and 7000 basis functions. The largest calculations performed (the crambin protein solvated by 500 explicit water molecules in a triple-ζ basis) featured more than 2000 atoms and more than 33,000 basis functions.
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.