ArticleJournal of chemical theory and computation2025
Benchmark of Approximate Quantum Chemical and Machine Learning Potentials for Biochemical Proton Transfer Reactions.
Article in Journal of chemical theory and computation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Near Black Box Parameter Optimizer for NDDO-Descendant Semiempirical Methods: Demonstrations for MNDO and AM1.The journal of physical chemistry. A · 2026Article
- Proton Transfer through a Charged Conduit in Respiratory Complex I: Long-Range Effects and Conformational Gating.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2025Article
- Benchmark of Approximate Quantum Chemical and Machine Learning Potentials for Biochemical Proton Transfer Reactions.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Proton transfer reactions are among the most common chemical transformations and are central to enzymatic catalysis and bioenergetic processes. Their mechanisms are often investigated using DFT or approximate quantum chemical methods, whose accuracy directly impacts the reliability of the simulations. Here, a comprehensive set of semiempirical molecular orbital and tight-binding DFT approaches, along with recently developed machine learning (ML) potentials, are benchmarked against high-level MP2 reference data for a curated set of proton transfer reactions representative of biochemical systems. Relative energies, geometries, and dipole moments are evaluated for isolated reactions. Microsolvated reactions are also simulated using a hybrid QM/MM partition. Traditional DFT methods offer high accuracy in general but show markedly larger deviations for proton transfers involving nitrogen-containing groups. Among approximate models, RM1, PM6, PM7, DFTB2-NH, DFTB3, and GFN2-xTB show reasonable accuracy across properties, though their performance varies by chemical group. The ML-corrected (Δ-learning) model PM6-ML improves accuracy for all properties and chemical groups and transfers well to QM/MM simulations. Conversely, standalone ML potentials perform poorly for most reactions. These results provide a basis for evaluating approximate methods and selecting potentials for proton transfer simulations in complex environments.
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.