Solubility curves and nucleation rates from molecular dynamics for polymorph prediction – moving beyond lattice energy minimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current polymorph prediction methods, known as lattice energy minimization, seek to determine the crystal lattice with the lowest potential energy, rendering it unable to predict solvent dependent metastable form crystallization. Facilitated by embarrassingly parallel, multiple replica, large-scale molecular dynamics simulations, we report on a new method concerned with predicting crystal structures using the kinetics and solubility of the low energy polymorphs predicted by lattice energy minimization. The proposed molecular dynamics simulation methodology provides several new predictions to the field of crystallization. (1) The methodology is shown to correctly predict the kinetic preference for β-glycine nucleation in water relative to α- and γ-glycine. (2) Analysis of nanocrystal melting temperatures show γ- nanocrystals have melting temperatures up to 20 K lower than either α- or β-glycine. This provides a striking explanation of how an energetically unstable classical nucleation theory (CNT) transition state complex leads to kinetic inaccessibility of γ-glycine in water, despite being the thermodynamically preferred polymorph predicted by lattice energy minimization. (3) The methodology also predicts polymorph-specific solubility curves, where the α-glycine solubility curve is reproduced to within 19% error, over a 45 K temperature range, using nothing but atomistic-level information provided from nucleation simulations. (4) Finally, the methodology produces the correct solubility ranking of β- > α-glycine. In this work, we demonstrate how the methodology supplements lattice energy minimization with molecular dynamics nucleation simulations to give the correct polymorph prediction, at different length scales, when lattice energy minimization alone would incorrectly predict the formation of γ-glycine in water from the ranking of lattice energies. Thus, lattice energy minimization optimization algorithms are supplemented with the necessary solvent/solute dependent solubility and nucleation kinetics of polymorphs to predict which structure will come out of solution, and not merely which structure has the most stable lattice energy.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".