Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42175905›Full record

ArticleJournal of chemical theory and computation2026

Bayesian Modeling of Polarizable Water: Lessons for Force Field Development.

Alfred T Nordman, Stefan Engblom, David van der Spoel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Alfred T NordmanDepartment of Cell and Molecular Biology, Uppsala University, Uppsala 751 23, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-6101-4823
Stefan EngblomDivision of Scientific Computing, Department of Information Technology, Uppsala University, Uppsala 751 23, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-3614-1732
David van der SpoelDepartment of Cell and Molecular Biology, Uppsala University, Uppsala 751 23, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-7659-8526

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Computer simulation of molecular dynamics is useful only when the accuracy of models and the uncertainty of model predictions can be quantified. The accuracy of simulations can usually be established by comparing with reference data from experiments or quantum chemistry. However, trade-offs in designing simulation models often lead to property-dependent accuracy. For instance, models trained to reproduce liquid-phase density and enthalpy of vaporization do not automatically reproduce solid or gas-phase properties. This means that the method chosen for force field design introduces uncertainties in the final model, which are often ignored. Although the statistical uncertainty due to stochastic simulations is usually accounted for, the uncertainty due to parameters is harder to quantify. In a recent paper(

Identifiers

PMID42175905
PMCPMC13255248

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.