2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.cossms.2013.09.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fitting empirical potentials: Challenges and methodologies

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
32
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 48 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Besides the cohesive, surface and stacking fault energies, the elastic constants of the FCC phase were also included in the fitting. The fitting procedure was carried out using the methodology of Potential Optimization Software for Materials (POSMat) [19] using a Simplex algorithm [20].…”
Section: Parameterization Of Nimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Besides the cohesive, surface and stacking fault energies, the elastic constants of the FCC phase were also included in the fitting. The fitting procedure was carried out using the methodology of Potential Optimization Software for Materials (POSMat) [19] using a Simplex algorithm [20].…”
Section: Parameterization Of Nimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, given the reductionist nature of the present model, we do not consider that orientation. In addition, the challenges to constructing adequate force fields for solid/liquid interfaces used in the MD studies [52], and the assignments of orientations based on SERS spectra [53,54], may not be completely definitive as to proving that the flat orientation is preferred. Furthermore, the investigation of Kovacevic et al using the dispersion corrected function PBE + D showed that the zero tilt (i.e., normal orientation as closest to what we have simulated herein) system for imidazole was the lowest energy case on Cu(111) [55].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A number of different formulations are often used and various techniques can be applied for developing these potentials, but understanding the uncertainty that enters into molecular dynamics simulations requires a firm understanding of the relationship between the interatomic potential, the responses included in the training set, and the properties computed in atomistic simulations. In fact, there is an increasing amount of interatomic potential research in the community with regards to cataloging interatomic potentials, tests, and properties [1][2][3][4], optimization techniques for high-dimensional spaces [5][6][7], and understanding the change (or uncertainty) in properties over multiple potentials [8][9][10], all of which are aimed at bringing further understanding to the material constitutive model (i.e., interatomic potentials) that drives atomistic simulations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%