Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 175

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Estimation of Absolute Free Energies of Hydration Using Continuum Methods: Accuracy of Partial Charge Models and Optimization of Nonpolar Contributions

Rizzo, Robert C., Aynechi, Tiba, Case, David A., Kuntz, Irwin D.·2006·Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation

Abstract

Absolute free energies of hydration (ΔGhyd) for more than 500 neutral and charged compounds have been computed, using Poisson-Boltzmann (PB) and Generalized Born (GB) continuum methods plus a solvent-accessible surface area (SA) term, to evaluate the accuracy of eight simple point-charge models used in molecular modeling. The goal is to develop improved procedures and protocols for protein-ligand binding calculations and virtual screening (docking). The best overall PBSA and GBSA results, in comparison with experimental ΔGhyd values for small molecules, were obtained using MSK, RESP, or ChelpG charges obtained from ab initio calculations using 6-31G* wave functions. Correlations using semiempirical (AM1BCC, AM1CM2, and PM3CM2) or empirical (Gasteiger-Marsili and MMFF94) methods yielded mixed results, particularly for charged compounds. For neutral compounds, the AM1BCC method yielded the best agreement with experimental results. In all cases, the PBSA and GBSA results are highly correlated (overall r(2) = 0.94), which highlights the fact that various partial charge models influence the final results much more than which continuum method is used to compute hydration free energies. Overall improved agreement with experimental results was demonstrated using atom-based constants in place of a single surface area term. Sets of optimized SA constants, suitable for use with a given charge model, were derived by fitting to the difference in experimental free energies and polar continuum results. The use of optimized atom-based SA constants for the computation of ΔGhyd can fine-tune already reasonable agreement with experimental results, ameliorate gross deficiencies in any particular charge model, account for nonoptimal radii, or correct for systematic errors.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/ct050097l

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Rizzo, R. C., Aynechi, T., Case, D. A., & Kuntz, I. D.
Venue
Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
Published
2005-11-15
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
128-139
ISSN
  • 1549-9618 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-9626
OpenAlex
W2020475659
Cited by
175
References
4
FWCI
4.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.