MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032459215 · doi:10.1021/jp9020799

Restoring Charge Asymmetry in Continuum Electrostatics Calculations of Hydration Free Energies

2009· article· en· W2032459215 on OpenAlexaff
Enrico O. Purisima, Traian Sulea

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry B · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical Studies
Canadian institutionsBiotechnology Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolvationAsymmetryCharge densityElectrostaticsChemistryPoisson's equationAtom (system on chip)Charge (physics)Solvation shellDielectricElectric potential energyEffective nuclear chargeMolecular dynamicsMolecular physicsAtomic physicsMoleculePhysicsComputational chemistryQuantum mechanicsIonEnergy (signal processing)Physical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Implicit solvation models are symmetric with respect to charge inversion. On the other hand, explicit solvent simulations show significant asymmetry in hydration free energies with respect to charge reversal. It has not been obvious how implicit solvation models can be modified in a general way to address this serious shortcoming. We solve this problem by using the induced surface charge density (ISCD) obtained from a boundary element solution of the Poisson equation to derive a simple customized correction for the Born radius of each atom. This simple correction restores the charge asymmetry and reproduces the hydration free energies from free energy perturbation calculations with a high degree of fidelity. The induced surface charge density profile of an atom essentially provides a measure of the average preferred orientation of a water molecule in the first solvation shell, thereby allowing a proper assignment of the dielectric boundary. We refer to these modified radii as ISCD-corrected Born radii.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry BSame topicSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical StudiesFrench-language works237,207