The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
New Class IV Charge Model for Extracting Accurate Partial Charges from Wave Functions
Abstract
We propose a new formalism, Charge Model 2 (CM2), to obtain accurate partial atomic charges from a population analysis of wave functions by a parametrized mapping procedure, so that the resulting charges reproduce highly accurate charge-dependent observables. The new method, which produces class IV charges, is illustrated by developing CM2 mappings of Löwdin charges obtained from semiempirical and ab initio Hartree−Fock theory and density functional theory, in particular AM1, PM3, HF/MIDI!, HF/6-31G*, HF/6-31+G*, BPW91/MIDI!, BPW91/6-31G*, B3LYP/MIDI!, and BPW91/DZVP calculations. The CM2 partial charges reproduce experimental dipole moments with root-mean-square errors that are typically a factor of 7 better than dipole moments computed from Mulliken population analysis, a factor of 3 better than dipole moments computed by Löwdin analysis, and even a factor of 2 better than dipole moments computed from the continuous electron denisty. At the HF/6-31G* and B3LYP/MIDI! levels, the new charge model yields root-mean-square errors of 0.19 and 0.18 D, respectively, for the dipole moments of a set of 211 polar molecules containing a diverse range of structures and organic functional groups and the elements H, C, N, O, F, Si, P, S, Cl, Br, and I. A comparison shows that the new charge model predicts dipole moments more accurately than MP2/cc-pVDZ calculations, which are considerably more expensive. The quality of the results is similarly good for electrostatic potentials and for the other parametrizations as well.
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
Self-consistent molecular orbital methods. XX. A basis set for correlated wave functions
Krishnan, R., Binkley, J. S., Seeger, R., & Pople, J. A. (1980) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/1.438955 · Cited by 17,772
Cited by
Structural Survey of Zinc-Containing Proteins and Development of the Zinc AMBER Force Field (ZAFF)
Peters, M. B., Yang, Y., Wang, B., Füsti-Molnár, L., Weaver, M. N., & Merz, K. M. (2010) · Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation · doi:10.1021/ct1002626 · Cited by 501
Huang, S.-Y., Grinter, S. Z., & Zou, X. (2010) · Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics · doi:10.1039/c0cp00151a · Cited by 508
Mobley, D. L., Chodera, J. D., & Dill, K. A. (2006) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/1.2221683 · Cited by 316
Predicting Absolute Ligand Binding Free Energies to a Simple Model Site
Mobley, D. L., Graves, A. P., Chodera, J. D., McReynolds, A. C., Shoichet, B. K., & Dill, K. A. (2007) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2007.06.002 · Cited by 310
In silico design of novel probes for the atypical opioid receptor MRGPRX2
Lansu, K., Karpiak, J., Liu, J., Huang, X.-P., McCorvy, J. D., Kroeze, W. K., Che, T., Nagase, H., Carroll, F. I., Jin, J., et al. (2017) · Nature Chemical Biology · doi:10.1038/nchembio.2334 · Cited by 293
Metadata
- Authors
- Li, J., Zhu, T., Cramer, C. J., & Truhlar, D. G.
- Venue
- The Journal of Physical Chemistry A
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 1998-02-12
- Volume
- 102
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1820-1831
- ISSN
- 1089-5639 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5215
- OpenAlex
- W2050470003
- Cited by
- 259
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 9.32
- 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.