The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Electrostatic Potential Derived Atomic Charges for Periodic Systems Using a Modified Error Functional
Abstract
A method to generate electrostatic potential (ESP) derived atomic charges in crystalline solids from periodic quantum mechanical calculations, termed the REPEAT method, is presented. Conventional ESP fitting procedures developed for molecular systems, in general, will not work for crystalline systems because the electrostatic potential in periodic systems is ill-defined up to a constant offset at each spatial position. In this work the problem is circumvented by introducing a new error functional which acts on the relative differences of the potential and not on its absolute values, as it is currently done with molecular ESP charge derivation methods. We formally demonstrate that the new functional reduces to the conventional error functional used in molecular ESP approaches when the simulation box of the periodic calculation becomes infinitely large. Several tests are presented to validate the new technique. For the periodic calculation of isolated molecules, the REPEAT charges are found to be in good agreement with those determined with established molecular ESP charge derivation methods. For siliceous sodalite, it is demonstrated that conventional molecular ESP approaches generate 'unphysical' charges, whereas the REPEAT method produces charges that are both chemically intuitive and consistent between different periodic electronic structure packages. The new approach is employed to generate partial atomic charges of various microporous materials and compared to both experimentally derived and molecular fragment ESP charges. This method can be used to generate partial atomic charges to be used in simulations of microporous and nanoporous materials, such as zeolites and metal organic framework materials.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
From ultrasoft pseudopotentials to the projector augmented-wave method
Kresse, G., & Joubert, D. (1999) · Physical Review B · doi:10.1103/physrevb.59.1758 · Cited by 85,307
Cited by
Kühne, T. D., Iannuzzi, M., Del Ben, M., Rybkin, V. V., Seewald, P., Stein, F., Laino, T., Khaliullin, R. Z., Schütt, O., Schiffmann, F., et al. (2020) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/5.0007045 · Cited by 4,468
Efficient evaluation of electrostatic potential with computerized optimized code
Zhang, J., & Lu, T. (2021) · Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics · doi:10.1039/d1cp02805g · Cited by 2,635
CO2 Capture and Separations Using MOFs: Computational and Experimental Studies
Yu, J., Xie, L.-H., Li, J.-R., Ma, Y., Seminario, J. M., & Balbuena, P. B. (2017) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.6b00626 · Cited by 1,047
Advances in theory and their application within the field of zeolite chemistry
Van Speybroeck, V., Hemelsoet, K., Joos, L., Waroquier, M., Bell, R. G., & Catlow, C. R. A. (2015) · Chemical Society Reviews · doi:10.1039/c5cs00029g · Cited by 516
On the inner workings of Monte Carlo codes
Dubbeldam, D., Torres-Knoop, A., & Walton, K. S. (2013) · Molecular Simulation · doi:10.1080/08927022.2013.819102 · Cited by 422
Structure–property relationships of porous materials for carbon dioxide separation and capture
Wilmer, C. E., Farha, O. K., Bae, Y.-S., Hupp, J. T., & Snurr, R. Q. (2012) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/c2ee23201d · Cited by 388
Tu, S., Zhang, B., Zhang, Y., Chen, Z., Wang, X., Zhan, R., Ou, Y., Wang, W., Liu, X., Duan, X., et al. (2023) · Nature Energy · doi:10.1038/s41560-023-01387-5 · Cited by 382
Lee, K., Howe, J. D., Lin, L.-C., Smit, B., & Neaton, J. B. (2015) · Chemistry of Materials · doi:10.1021/cm502760q · Cited by 307
Fernandez, M., Boyd, P. G., Daff, T. D., Aghaji, M. Z., & Woo, T. K. (2014) · The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters · doi:10.1021/jz501331m · Cited by 296
Self-citationMaterials design by evolutionary optimization of functional groups in metal-organic frameworks
Collins, S. P., Daff, T. D., Piotrkowski, S. S., & Woo, T. K. (2016) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.1600954 · Cited by 107
Self-citationFischer, M., & Bell, R. G. (2013) · The Journal of Physical Chemistry C · doi:10.1021/jp405507y · Cited by 24
Computational evaluation of aluminophosphate zeotypes for CO 2 /N 2 separation
Fischer, M. (2017) · Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics · doi:10.1039/c7cp03841k · Cited by 18
Performance-Based Screening of Porous Materials for Carbon Capture
Farmahini, A. H., Krishnamurthy, S., Friedrich, D., Brandani, S., & Sarkisov, L. (2021) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c01266 · Cited by 7
Metadata
- Authors
- Campañá, C., Mussard, B., & Woo, T. K.
- Venue
- Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2009-08-27
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 2866-2878
- ISSN
- 1549-9618 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-9626
- OpenAlex
- W2030332716
- Cited by
- 353
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.32
- 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.