ArticlePrecision chemistry2026
Benchmarking Foundation Potentials against Quantum Chemistry Methods for Predicting Molecular Redox Potentials.
Article in Precision chemistry, 2026. 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.
- Accurate and Time-Efficient Condensed-Phase Free Energy Simulations with Reaction Specific Δ-Machine Learning Potentials in CHARMM.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2026Article
- Quantum Landscape of Precision Chemistry.Precision chemistry · 2026Article
- Accuracy and Efficiency Benchmarks of Pretrained Machine Learning Potentials for Molecular Simulations.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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computational high-throughput virtual screening is essential for identifying redox-active molecules for sustainable applications, such as electrochemical carbon capture. A primary challenge in this approach is the high computational cost associated with accurate quantum chemistry calculations. Machine learning foundation potentials (FPs) trained on extensive density functional theory (DFT) calculations offer a computationally efficient alternative. Here, we benchmark the MACE-OMol-0 and UMA FPs against a hierarchy of DFT functionals for predicting experimental molecular redox potentials for both electron transfer (ET) and proton-coupled electron transfer (PCET) reactions. We find that these FPs achieve exceptional accuracy for PCET processes, rivaling their target DFT method. However, the performance is diminished for ET reactions, particularly for multielectron transfers involving reactive ions that are underrepresented in the OMol25 training data, revealing a key out-of-distribution limitation. To overcome this, we propose an optimal hybrid workflow that uses the FPs for efficient geometry optimization and thermochemical analysis, followed by a crucial single-point DFT energy refinement and an implicit solvation correction. This pragmatic approach provides a robust and scalable strategy for accelerating high-throughput virtual screening in sustainable chemistry.
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.