Refine
H-BRS Bibliography
- yes (24)
Departments, institutes and facilities
- Fachbereich Ingenieurwissenschaften und Kommunikation (24) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (11)
- Conference Object (10)
- Preprint (2)
- Part of a Book (1)
Year of publication
Keywords
- Force field (3)
- ACPYPE (1)
- AMBER (1)
- Alkane (1)
- Basis set (1)
- Carbohydrate (1)
- Computational chemistry (1)
- Computational modeling (1)
- Glycam06 (1)
- Gromacs (1)
Force field (FF) based molecular modeling is an often used method to investigate and study structural and dynamic properties of (bio-)chemical substances and systems. When such a system is modeled or refined, the force field parameters need to be adjusted. This force field parameter optimization can be a tedious task and is always a trade-off in terms of errors regarding the targeted properties. To better control the balance of various properties’ errors, in this study we introduce weighting factors for the optimization objectives. Different weighting strategies are compared to fine-tune the balance between bulk-phase density and relative conformational energies (RCE), using n-octane as a representative system. Additionally, a non-linear projection of the individual property-specific parts of the optimized loss function is deployed to further improve the balance between them. The results show that the overall error is reduced. One interesting outcome is a large variety in the resulting optimized force field parameters (FFParams) and corresponding errors, suggesting that the optimization landscape is multi-modal and very dependent on the weighting factor setup. We conclude that adjusting the weighting factors can be a very important feature to lower the overall error in the FF optimization procedure, giving researchers the possibility to fine-tune their FFs.
Wo Laborexperimente zu aufwendig, zu teuer, zu langsam oder zu gefährlich oder Stoffeigenschaften gar nicht erst experimentell zugänglich sind, können Computersimulationen von Atomen und Molekülen diese ersetzen oder ergänzen. Sie ermöglichen dadurch Reduktion von Kosten, Entwicklungszeit und Materialeinsatz. Die für diese Simulationen benötigten Molekülmodelle beinhalten zahlreiche Parameter, die der Simulant einstellen oder auswählen muss. Eine passende Parametrierung ist nur bei entsprechenden Kenntnissen über die Auswirkungen der Parameter auf die zu berechnenden Größen und Eigenschaften möglich. Eine Gruppe von Standardparametern in molekularen Simulationen sind die Partialladungen der einzelnen Atome innerhalb eines Moleküls. Die räumliche Ladungsverteilung innerhalb des Moleküls wird durch Punktladungen auf den Atomzentren angenähert. Für diese Annäherung existieren diverse Ansätze für verschiedene Molekülklassen und Anwendungen. In diesem Teilprojekt des Promotionsvorhabens wurde systematisch der Einfluss der Wahl des Partialladungssatzes auf potentielle Energien und ausgewählte makroskopische Eigenschaften aus Molekulardynamik-Simulationen evaluiert. Es konnte gezeigt werden, dass insbesondere bei stark polaren Molekülen die Auswahl des geeigneten Partialladungssatzes entscheidenden Einfluss auf die Simulationsergebnisse hat und daher nicht naiv, sondern nur ganz gezielt getroffen werden darf.
Energy Profiles of the Ring Puckering of Cyclopentane, Methylcyclopentane and Ethylcyclopentane
(2019)
In an effort to assist researchers in choosing basis sets for quantum mechanical modeling of molecules (i.e. balancing calculation cost versus desired accuracy), we present a systematic study on the accuracy of computed conformational relative energies and their geometries in comparison to MP2/CBS and MP2/AV5Z data, respectively. In order to do so, we introduce a new nomenclature to unambiguously indicate how a CBS extrapolation was computed. Nineteen minima and transition states of buta-1,3-diene, propan-2-ol and the water dimer were optimized using forty-five different basis sets. Specifically, this includes one Pople (i.e. 6-31G(d)), eight Dunning (i.e. VXZ and AVXZ, X=2-5), twenty-five Jensen (i.e. pc-n, pcseg-n, aug-pcseg-n, pcSseg-n and aug-pcSseg-n, n=0-4) and nine Karlsruhe (e.g. def2-SV(P), def2-QZVPPD) basis sets. The molecules were chosen to represent both common and electronically diverse molecular systems. In comparison to MP2/CBS relative energies computed using the largest Jensen basis sets (i.e. n=2,3,4), the use of smaller sizes (n=0,1,2 and n=1,2,3) provides results that are within 0.11--0.24 and 0.09-0.16 kcal/mol. To practically guide researchers in their basis set choice, an equation is introduced that ranks basis sets based on a user-defined balance between their accuracy and calculation cost. Furthermore, we explain why the aug-pcseg-2, def2-TZVPPD and def2-TZVP basis sets are very suitable choices to balance speed and accuracy.
The elucidation of conformations and relative potential energies (rPEs) of small molecules has a long history across a diverse range of fields. Periodically, it is helpful to revisit what conformations have been investigated and to provide a consistent theoretical framework for which clear comparisons can be made. In this paper, we compute the minima, first- and second-order saddle points, and torsion-coupled surfaces for methanol, ethanol, propan-2-ol, and propanol using consistent high-level MP2 and CCSD(T) methods. While for certain molecules more rigorous methods were employed, the CCSD(T)/aug-cc-pVTZ//MP2/aug-cc-pV5Z theory level was used throughout to provide relative energies of all minima and first-order saddle points. The rPE surfaces were uniformly computed at the CCSD(T)/aug-cc-pVTZ//MP2/aug-cc-pVTZ level. To the best of our knowledge, this represents the most extensive study for alcohols of this kind, revealing some new aspects. Especially for propanol, we report several new conformations that were previously not investigated. Moreover, two metrics are included in our analysis that quantify how the selected surfaces are similar to one another and hence improve our understanding of the relationship between these alcohols.
Herein we report an update to ACPYPE, a Python3 tool that now properly converts AMBER to GROMACS topologies for force fields that utilize nondefault and nonuniform 1–4 electrostatic and nonbonded scaling factors or negative dihedral force constants. Prior to this work, ACPYPE only converted AMBER topologies that used uniform, default 1–4 scaling factors and positive dihedral force constants. We demonstrate that the updated ACPYPE accurately transfers the GLYCAM06 force field from AMBER to GROMACS topology files, which employs non-uniform 1–4 scaling factors as well as negative dihedral force constants. Validation was performed using β-d-GlcNAc through gas-phase analysis of dihedral energy curves and probability density functions. The updated ACPYPE retains all of its original functionality, but now allows the simulation of complex glycomolecular systems in GROMACS using AMBER-originated force fields. ACPYPE is available for download at https://github.com/alanwilter/acpype.