ArticleJournal of chemical theory and computation2026
pyEF: A Python Framework for QM and QM/MM Atom-Wise Electric Field Analysis.
Article in Journal of chemical theory and computation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- pyEF: A Python Framework for QM and QM/MM Atom-Wise Electric Field Analysis.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2026Article
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
We introduce pyEF, a software package for computing molecular electric fields, electrostatic interaction energies, and electrostatic potentials from quantum mechanical (QM) atom-centered multipole expansions with atom-wise decomposable contributions. We demonstrate the computational efficiency and accuracy of this QM-derived electric field evaluation tool through several tests. To assess the influence of the underlying QM method and charge partitioning scheme on these electrostatic quantities, we analyze over 250 configurations of an acetone solute molecule in five solvents of variable polarity. We find that electric field calculations are highly sensitive to the choice of charge partitioning method. Even among real-space charge schemes, acetone Stark tuning rates differ by up to a factor of 2. Benchmarking computed solvent dipole moments against experimental bulk values, we conclude that the CM5, ADCH, and Hirshfeld-I charge schemes most reliably capture solvent electrostatics and therefore provide a more faithful foundation for computing electric fields. When constructed from these real-space charges, electric fields are nearly insensitive to basis set size and monotonically increase in magnitude with higher Fock exchange. We also demonstrate efficient convergence of QM electrostatics when more distant molecules are represented solely by MM point charges, reducing computational overhead. Leveraging these findings, we demonstrate the use of pyEF to deduce environmental effects on a transition metal complex from a Ga
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.