Cited by 83Computational Drug Discovery MethodsProtein Structure and DynamicsAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies

BFEE2: Automated, Streamlined, and Accurate Absolute Binding Free-Energy Calculations

Fu, Haohao, Chen, Haochuan, Cai, Wensheng, Shao, Xueguang, Chipot, Christophe·2021·Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling

Abstract

, following either an alchemical or a geometrical route, involves several subprocesses and requires the introduction of geometric restraints. Human intervention, for instance, to define the necessary collective variables, prepare the input files, monitor the simulation, and perform post-treatments is, however, tedious, cumbersome, and prone to errors. With the aim of automating and streamlining free-energy calculations, especially for nonexperts, version 2.0 of the binding free energy estimator (BFEE2) provides both standardized alchemical and geometrical workflows and obviates the need for extensive human intervention to guarantee complete reproducibility of the results. To achieve the largest gamut of protein-ligand and, more generally, of host-guest complexes, BFEE2 supports most academic force fields, such as CHARMM, Amber, OPLS, and GROMOS. Configurational files are generated in the NAMD and Gromacs formats, and all the post-treatments are performed in an automated fashion. Moreover, convergence of the free-energy calculation can be monitored from the intermediate files generated during the simulation. All in all, BFEE2 is a foolproof, versatile tool for accurate absolute binding free-energy calculations, assisting the end-user over a broad range of applications.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/acs.jcim.1c00269

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fu, H., Chen, H., Cai, W., Shao, X., & Chipot, C.
Affiliations
  • Nankai University (CN)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Corresponding author
  • Cai, Wensheng
  • Shao, Xueguang
  • Chipot, Christophe
Venue
Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
Published
2021-04-27
Volume
61
Issue
5
Pages
2116-2123
ISSN
  • 1549-9596 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-960X
OpenAlex
W3158032220
Cited by
83
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 5
FWCI
7.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Agence Nationale de la Recherche
  • Natural Science Foundation of Tianjin City (18JCYBJC20500)
  • Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China (63201015, 63201043)
  • China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (bs6619012)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (21775076, 22073050)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Advanced Chemical Physics Studies
Keywords
absolute binding free energy, alchemical free energy calculations, protein-ligand binding, host-guest complexes, workflow automation, force fields, neovascular age-related macular degeneration, GROMACS, reproducibility
MeSH terms
Humans, Ligands, Thermodynamics, Reproducibility of Results, Entropy, Molecular Dynamics Simulation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review