ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025
Computational investigation of water glasses using machine-learning potentials.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 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.
- A local structural basis to distinguish amorphous ices.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Sub-diffractional infrared absorption of two-dimensional water.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Energy landscape statistics and thermodynamics of a machine-learned model of water.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Computational investigation of water glasses using machine-learning potentials.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The molecular origins of water's anomalous properties have long been a subject of scientific inquiry. The liquid-liquid phase transition hypothesis, which posits the existence of distinct low-density and high-density liquid states separated by a first-order phase transition terminating at a critical point, has gained increasing experimental and computational support and offers a thermodynamically consistent framework for many of water's anomalies. However, experimental challenges in avoiding crystallization near the postulated liquid-liquid critical point have focused attention to water's canonical glassy states: low-density and high-density amorphous ice. Here, we use two Deep Potential machine-learning models, trained on the Strongly Constrained and Appropriately Normed density functional and the highly accurate Many-Body Polarizable potential, to conduct an investigation of water's glassy phenomenology based on quantum mechanical calculations. Despite not being explicitly trained on amorphous ices, both models accurately capture the structure and transformation of the water glasses, including their interconversion along different thermodynamic paths. Isobaric quenching of liquid water at various pressures generates a continuum of intermediate amorphous ices and density fluctuations increase near the liquid-liquid critical pressure. The glass transition temperatures of the amorphous ices produced at different pressures exhibit two distinct branches, corresponding to low-density and high-density amorphous ice behaviors, consistent with experiment and the liquid-liquid transition hypothesis. Extrapolating transformation pressures from isothermal compressions to experimental compression rates brings our simulations into excellent agreement with data. Our findings demonstrate that machine-learning potentials trained on equilibrium phases can effectively model nonequilibrium glassy behavior and pave the way for studying long-timescale, out-of-equilibrium processes with quantum mechanical accuracy.
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.