Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 808

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Determining the shear viscosity of model liquids from molecular dynamics simulations

Open access
Hess, Berk·2002·The Journal of Chemical Physics

Abstract

Several methods are available for calculating shear viscosities of liquids from molecular dynamics simulations. There are equilibrium methods based on pressure or momentum fluctuations and several nonequilibrium methods. For the nonequilibrium method using a periodic shear flow, all relevant quantities, including the accuracy, can be estimated before performing the simulation. We compared the applicability, accuracy and efficiency of this method with two equilibrium methods and another nonequilibrium method, using simulations of a Lennard-Jones fluid and the SPC and SPC/E [(extended) simple point charge] water models.

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 · 10.1063/1.1421362

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.

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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Hess, B.
Venue
The Journal of Chemical Physics
Published
2002-01-01
Volume
116
Issue
1
Pages
209-217
ISSN
  • 0021-9606 (ISSN-L)
  • 1089-7690
OpenAlex
W2017019577
Cited by
808
References
0
FWCI
3.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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.