The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Fragment charge difference method for estimating donor–acceptor electronic coupling: Application to DNA π-stacks
Abstract
The purpose of this communication is two-fold. We introduce the fragment charge difference (FCD) method to estimate the electron transfer matrix element HDA between a donor D and an acceptor A, and we apply this method to several aspects of hole transfer electronic couplings in π-stacks of DNA, including systems with several donor–acceptor sites. Within the two-state model, our scheme can be simplified to recover a convenient estimate of the electron transfer matrix element HDA=(1−Δq2)1/2(E2−E1)/2 based on the vertical excitation energy E2–E1 and the charge difference Δq between donor and acceptor. For systems with strong charge separation, Δq≳0.95, one should resort to the FCD method. As favorable feature, we demonstrate the stability of the FCD approach for systems which require an approach beyond the two-state model. On the basis of ab initio calculations of various DNA related systems, we compared three approaches for estimating the electronic coupling: the minimum splitting method, the generalized Mulliken–Hush (GMH) scheme, and the FCD approach. We studied the sensitivity of FCD and GMH couplings to the donor–acceptor energy gap and found both schemes to be quite robust; they are applicable also in cases where donor and acceptor states are off resonance. In the application to π-stacks of DNA, we demonstrated for the Watson–Crick pair dimer [(GC),(GC)] how structural changes considerably affect the coupling strength of electron hole transfer. For models of three Watson–Crick pairs, we showed that the two-state model significantly overestimates the hole transfer coupling whereas simultaneous treatment of several states leads to satisfactory results.
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
Long-Range Charge Transfer in DNA: Transient Structural Distortions Control the Distance Dependence
Schuster, G. B. (2000) · Accounts of Chemical Research · doi:10.1021/ar980059z · Cited by 778
Cited by
Biochemistry and Theory of Proton-Coupled Electron Transfer
Migliore, A., Polizzi, N. F., Therien, M. J., & Beratan, D. N. (2014) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr4006654 · Cited by 520
Theoretical Modeling of Singlet Fission
Casanova, D. (2018) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.7b00601 · Cited by 468
Recent Advances in the Theory and Molecular Simulation of Biological Electron Transfer Reactions
Blumberger, J. (2015) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00298 · Cited by 450
Stereoselective amino acid synthesis by synergistic photoredox-pyridoxal radical biocatalysis
Cheng, L., Li, D., Mai, B. K., Bo, Z., Cheng, L., Liu, P., & Yang, Y. (2023) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.adg2420 · Cited by 253
Metadata
- Authors
- Voityuk, A. A., & Rösch, N.
- Venue
- The Journal of Chemical Physics
- Publisher
- AIP Publishing
- Published
- 2002-09-22
- Volume
- 117
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 5607-5616
- ISSN
- 0021-9606 (ISSN-L)
- 1089-7690
- OpenAlex
- W2010660548
- Cited by
- 353
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 3.55
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Fragment charge difference method for estimating donor–acceptor electronic coupling: Application to DNA π-stacks. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1063/1.1502255
- The paper
- Voityuk, A. A., & Rösch, N. (2002). Fragment charge difference method for estimating donor–acceptor electronic coupling: Application to DNA π-stacks. The Journal of Chemical Physics. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1502255
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.