The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
What ice can teach us about water interactions: a critical comparison of the performance of different water models
Open accessAbstract
The performance of several popular water models (TIP3P, TIP4P, TIP5P and TIP4P/2005) is analyzed. For that purpose the predictions for ten different properties of water are investigated, namely: 1. vapour-liquid equilibria (VLE) and critical temperature; 2. surface tension; 3. densities of the different solid structures of water (ices); 4. phase diagram; 5. melting-point properties; 6. maximum in the density of water at room pressure and thermal coefficients alpha and KT; 7. structure of liquid water and ice; 8. equation of state at high pressures; 9. self-diffusion coefficient; 10. dielectric constant. For each property, the performance of each model is analyzed in detail with a critical discussion of the possible reason of the success or failure of the model. A final judgement on the quality of these models is provided. TIP4P/2005 provides the best description of almost all properties of the list, the only exception being the dielectric constant. In second position, TIP5P and TIP4P yield a similar performance overall, and the last place with the poorest description of the water properties is provided by TIP3P. The ideas leading to the proposal and design of the TIP4P/2005 are also discussed in detail. TIP4P/2005 is probably close to the best description of water that can be achieved with a non-polarizable model described by a single Lennard-Jones (LJ) site and three charges.
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
Computer Simulation of Liquids
Allen, M. P., & Tildesley, D. J. (2017) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198803195.001.0001 · Cited by 20,945
Cited by
Simulating water with rigid non-polarizable models: a general perspective
Vega, C., & Abascal, J. L. F. (2011) · Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics · doi:10.1039/c1cp22168j · Cited by 991
Self-citationAuxiliary Density Matrix Methods for Hartree−Fock Exchange Calculations
Guidon, M., Hutter, J., & VandeVondele, J. (2010) · Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation · doi:10.1021/ct1002225 · Cited by 608
Molecular Dynamics Simulations of Membrane Permeability
Venable, R. M., Krämer, A., & Pastor, R. W. (2019) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.8b00486 · Cited by 394
Homogeneous Ice Nucleation at Moderate Supercooling from Molecular Simulation
Sanz, E., Vega, C., Espinosa, J. R., Caballero-Bernal, R., Abascal, J. L. F., & Valeriani, C. (2013) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/ja4028814 · Cited by 334
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Vega, C., Abascal, J. L. F., Conde, M. M., & Aragones, J. L.
- Venue
- Faraday Discuss.
- Publisher
- Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
- Published
- 2009
- Volume
- 141
- Pages
- 251-276
- ISSN
- 1359-6640 (ISSN-L)
- 1364-5498
- OpenAlex
- W1965076223
- Cited by
- 466
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 15.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: What ice can teach us about water interactions: a critical comparison of the performance of different water models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1039/b805531a
- The paper
- Vega, C., Abascal, J. L. F., Conde, M. M., & Aragones, J. L. (2009). What ice can teach us about water interactions: a critical comparison of the performance of different water models. Faraday Discuss. https://doi.org/10.1039/b805531a
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.