Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 455

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Improved Reweighting of Accelerated Molecular Dynamics Simulations for Free Energy Calculation

Open access
Miao, Yinglong, Sinko, William, Pierce, Levi, Bucher, Denis, Walker, Ross C., McCammon, J. Andrew·2014·Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation

Abstract

Abstract Accelerated molecular dynamics (aMD) simulations greatly improve the efficiency of conventional molecular dynamics (cMD) for sampling biomolecular conformations, but they require proper reweighting for free energy calculation. In this work, we systematically compare the accuracy of different reweighting algorithms including the exponential average, Maclaurin series, and cumulant expansion on three model systems: alanine dipeptide, chignolin, and Trp-cage. Exponential average reweighting can recover the original free energy profiles easily only when the distribution of the boost potential is narrow (e.g., the range ≤20kBT) as found in dihedral-boost aMD simulation of alanine dipeptide. In dual-boost aMD simulations of the studied systems, exponential average generally leads to high energetic fluctuations, largely due to the fact that the Boltzmann reweighting factors are dominated by a very few high boost potential frames. In comparison, reweighting based on Maclaurin series expansion (equivalent to cumulant expansion on the first order) greatly suppresses the energetic noise but often gives incorrect energy minimum positions and significant errors at the energy barriers (∼2–3kBT). Finally, reweighting using cumulant expansion to the second order is able to recover the most accurate free energy profiles within statistical errors of ∼kBT, particularly when the distribution of the boost potential exhibits low anharmonicity (i.e., near-Gaussian distribution), and should be of wide applicability. A toolkit of Python scripts for aMD reweighting “PyReweighting” is distributed free of charge at http://mccammon.ucsd.edu/computing/amdReweighting/.

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/ct500090q

Cites

42 of 42 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 455

Metadata

Authors
Miao, Y., Sinko, W., Pierce, L., Bucher, D., Walker, R. C., & McCammon, J. A.
Venue
Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
Published
2014-05-09
Volume
10
Issue
7
Pages
2677-2689
ISSN
  • 1549-9618 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-9626
OpenAlex
W2335200606
Cited by
455
References
42
FWCI
7.06
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.