Changes in the Local Conformational States Caused by Simple Na+ and K+ Ions in Polyelectrolyte Simulations: Comparison of Seven Force Fields with and without NBFIX and ECC Corrections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
counterions, were investigated using atomistic molecular dynamics (MD) simulations. We performed a comparison of seven popular force fields, namely AMBER99SB-ILDN, AMBER14SB, AMBER-FB15, CHARMM22*, CHARMM27, CHARMM36m and OPLS-AA/L, both with their native parameters and using two common corrections for overbinding of ions, the non-bonded fix (NBFIX), and electronic continuum corrections (ECC). These corrections were originally introduced to correct for the often-reported problem concerning the overbinding of ions to the charged groups of polyelectrolytes. In this work, a comparison of the simulation results with existing experimental data revealed several differences between the investigated force fields. The data from these simulations and comparisons with previous experimental data were then used to determine the limitations and strengths of these force fields in the context of the structural and dynamic properties of anionic polyamino acids. Physical properties, such as molecular sizes, local structure, and dynamics, were studied using two types of common counterions, namely potassium and sodium. The results show that, in some cases, both the macroion size and dynamics depend strongly on the models (parameters) for the counterions due to strong overbinding of the ions and charged side chain groups. The local structures and dynamics are more sensitive to dihedral angle parameterization, resulting in a preference for defined monomer conformations and the type of correction used. We also provide recommendations based on the results.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".