Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,019

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

S66: A Well-balanced Database of Benchmark Interaction Energies Relevant to Biomolecular Structures

Open access
Řezáč, Jan, Riley, Kevin E., Hobza, Pavel·2011·Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
DOI 10.1021/ct2002946
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

With numerous new quantum chemistry methods being developed in recent years and the promise of even more new methods to be developed in the near future, it is clearly critical that highly accurate, well-balanced, reference data for many different atomic and molecular properties be available for the parametrization and validation of these methods. One area of research that is of particular importance in many areas of chemistry, biology, and material science is the study of noncovalent interactions. Because these interactions are often strongly influenced by correlation effects, it is necessary to use computationally expensive high-order wave function methods to describe them accurately. Here, we present a large new database of interaction energies calculated using an accurate CCSD(T)/CBS scheme. Data are presented for 66 molecular complexes, at their reference equilibrium geometries and at 8 points systematically exploring their dissociation curves; in total, the database contains 594 points: 66 at equilibrium geometries, and 528 in dissociation curves. The data set is designed to cover the most common types of noncovalent interactions in biomolecules, while keeping a balanced representation of dispersion and electrostatic contributions. The data set is therefore well suited for testing and development of methods applicable to bioorganic systems. In addition to the benchmark CCSD(T) results, we also provide decompositions of the interaction energies by means of DFT-SAPT calculations. The data set was used to test several correlated QM methods, including those parametrized specifically for noncovalent interactions. Among these, the SCS-MI-CCSD method outperforms all other tested methods, with a root-mean-square error of 0.08 kcal/mol for the S66 data set.

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/ct2002946

Cites

46 of 46 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

Cited by

See all 1,019

Metadata

Authors
Řezáč, J., Riley, K. E., & Hobza, P.
Venue
Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
Publisher
American Chemical Society (ACS)
Published
2011-07-19
Volume
7
Issue
8
Pages
2427-2438
ISSN
  • 1549-9618 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-9626
DOI
10.1021/ct2002946
OpenAlex
W2018120102
Cited by
1,019
References
46
FWCI
35.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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.