MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406237537 · doi:10.26434/chemrxiv-2025-ttjb3

Nonbonded force field parameters derived from Atom-In-Molecules methods reproduce interactions in proteins from first--principles

2025· preprint· en· W4406237537 on OpenAlexaff
Carlos Castillo-Orellana, Farnaz Heidar‐Zadeh, Esteban Vöhringer‐Martinez

Bibliographic record

VenueChemRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCrystallography and molecular interactions
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
Keywordsvan der Waals forceForce field (fiction)ChemistryMolecular dynamicsChemical physicsMoleculeComputational chemistryNon-covalent interactionsElectrostaticsPhysicsQuantum mechanicsPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Non-covalent interactions govern many chemical and biological phenomena and are crucial in protein-protein interactions, enzyme catalysis, and DNA folding. The size of these macromolecules and their various conformations demand computational inexpensive force fields that can accurately mimic the quantum chemical nature of the atomic non-covalent interactions. Accurate force fields, coupled with increasingly longer molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, may empower us to predict conformational changes associated with the biochemical function of proteins. Here, we aim to derive nonbonded protein force field parameters from the partitioned electron density of amino acids - the fundamental units of proteins - via the atoms-in-molecules (AIM) approach. The AIM parameters are validated using a database of charged, aromatic and hyrdrophilic side chain interactions in 610 conformations, primarily involving pi-pi interactions, as recently reported by one of us. Electrostatic and van der Waals interaction energies calculated with nonbonded force field parameters from different AIM methodologies were compared to first principle interaction energies from absolute localized molecular orbital - energy decomposition analysis (ALMO-EDA) at the wB97XV/def2TZVPD level. Our findings show that electrostatic interactions between side chains are accurately reproduced by atomic charges from the minimal basis iterative stockholder (MBIS) scheme with mean absolute errors of 4-7 kJ/mol. Meanwhile, C6 coefficients from the MBIS AIM method effectively predicts dispersion interactions with a mean error of -2 kJ/mol and a maximal error or -5 kJ/mol. As an outlook to use AIM methods in the development of protein force fields we present the constrained AIM method that allows to fix backbone parameters during the optimization of side chain interactions. Backbone dihedral parameters have been optimized to reproduce secondary structure elements in proteins and not altering them maintains compatibility with conventional protein force fields while improving the description of side chain interactions. Our validated AIM methods allow for the depiction of non-covalent, long-range interactions in proteins using cost-effective force fields that achieve chemical precision.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemRxivSame topicCrystallography and molecular interactionsFrench-language works237,207