2010
DOI: 10.1007/s10822-010-9331-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance of the IEF-MST solvation continuum model in the SAMPL2 blind test prediction of hydration and tautomerization free energies

Abstract: The IEF-MST continuum solvation model is used to predict the hydration free energies and tautomeric preferences of a set of multifunctional compounds compiled as a blind test for computational solvation methods in the SAMPL2 contest. Computations of hydration free energies was performed using both HF/6-31G(d) and B3LYP/6-31G(d) versions of the IEF-MST model. For tautomeric preferences, the IEF-MST data was combined with the gas phase free energy differences predicted at different levels of theory ranging from … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
26
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
3
1
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
(45 reference statements)
2
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We expect that the proper application of any of the following seven methods (All-atom MD [77], multiconformer implicit solvation models such as COSMO-RS [78] and EPIC [79], and the FiSH [80], IEF-PCM [81], SM8 [8], or ZAP [82,83] implicit solvation methods which used single conformers) should lead to, with 95% confidence, transfer energies predictions within 2.0 kcal/mol of the experimental value for new unknowns. However, the average error for each of these methods has a greater than 95% chance of being larger than 1 kcal/mol, indicating there is still room for improvement.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We expect that the proper application of any of the following seven methods (All-atom MD [77], multiconformer implicit solvation models such as COSMO-RS [78] and EPIC [79], and the FiSH [80], IEF-PCM [81], SM8 [8], or ZAP [82,83] implicit solvation methods which used single conformers) should lead to, with 95% confidence, transfer energies predictions within 2.0 kcal/mol of the experimental value for new unknowns. However, the average error for each of these methods has a greater than 95% chance of being larger than 1 kcal/mol, indicating there is still room for improvement.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because the tautomer challenge involved only a few similar transitions, it is difficult to draw general conclusion about tautomer prediction from this exercise alone. For the aqueous transfer portions of the thermodynamic cycle, several solvation models may prove reliable (vide supra), but the methods of Luque [81], Klamt [78], and Kast [84] have all been demonstrated to perform equivalently well.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hence, the discrepancies were attributed to the inaccuracies of the SMx models [84]. In contrast, the analogous discrepancies observed for the IEF-MST solvation model were interpreted as caused by particularly important higher correlation effects in pyrazolones and isoxazolones [120]. No such distinction between tautomeric systems 1-8 and 10-16 is apparent for the COSMO-RS and EC-RISM calculations (Figure 13.4).…”
Section: The Sampl2 Challenge Of Predicting Tautomer Ratiosmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…Experimental K T values of the SAMPL2 challenge refer to aqueous solution and hence test not only for the reliability of the computational procedure used to obtain gas-phase energy differences but also and specifically the performance of the solvation model. These included mainly continuum models, IEF-MST [120] SMx (x = 8, 8AD, D) [84], and COSMO-RS [130]. As an example of an explicit solvent model, a variant of the three-dimensional reference interaction site model (embedded cluster 3D-RISM) was used [125].…”
Section: The Sampl2 Challenge Of Predicting Tautomer Ratiosmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation