Suppr超能文献

经典分子模拟到 QM/MM 势能的再加权方法比较。

Comparison of Methods To Reweight from Classical Molecular Simulations to QM/MM Potentials.

机构信息

Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Virginia , Charlottesville, Virginia 22904, United States.

Laboratory of Computational Biology, National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health , 5635 Fishers Lane, T-900 Suite, Rockville, Maryland 20852, United States.

出版信息

J Chem Theory Comput. 2016 Apr 12;12(4):1466-80. doi: 10.1021/acs.jctc.5b01188. Epub 2016 Mar 23.

Abstract

We examine methods to reweight classical molecular mechanics solvation calculations to more expensive QM/MM energy functions. We first consider the solvation free energy difference between ethane and methanol in a QM/MM Hamiltonian from configurations generated in a cheaper MM potential. The solute molecules in the QM/MM Hamiltonian are treated with B3LYP/6-31G*, and the solvent water molecules are treated classically. The free energy difference in the QM/MM Hamiltonian is estimated using Boltzmann reweighting with both the non-Boltzmann Bennett method (NBB) and the multistate Bennett acceptance ratio (MBAR), and the variance of each method is directly compared for an identical data set. For this system, MBAR-derived methods are found to produce smaller overall uncertainties than NBB-based methods. Additionally, we show that to reduce the variance in the overall free energy difference estimate in this system for a fixed amount of QM/MM calculations, the energy re-evaluations in the Boltzmann reweighting step should be concentrated on the physical MM states with the highest overlap to the QM/MM states, rather than allocated equally over all sampled MM states. We also show that reallocating the QM/MM re-evaluations can be used to diagnose poor overlap between the sampled and target state. The solvation free energies for molecules in the SAMPL4 solvation data set are also calculated in the QM/MM Hamiltonian with NBB and MBAR, and the variances are marginally smaller for MBAR. Overall, NBB and MBAR produce similar variances for systems with poor sampling efficiency, and MBAR provides smaller variances than NBB in systems with high sampling efficiency. Both NBB and MBAR converge to identical solvation free energy estimates in the QM/MM Hamiltonian, and the RMSD to experimental values for molecules in the SAMPL4 solvation data set decreases by approximately 28% when switching from the MM Hamiltonian to the QM/MM Hamiltonian.

摘要

我们研究了重新加权经典分子力学溶剂化计算以获得更昂贵的QM/MM 能量函数的方法。我们首先考虑了在从更便宜的 MM 势能生成的构型中生成的 QM/MM 哈密顿量中乙烷和甲醇之间的溶剂化自由能差。QM/MM 哈密顿量中的溶质分子用 B3LYP/6-31G*处理,溶剂水分子用经典方法处理。使用 Boltzmann 再加权法(包括非 Boltzmann Bennett 方法(NBB)和多态 Bennett 接受比(MBAR))来估计 QM/MM 哈密顿量中的自由能差,并直接比较每种方法的方差对于相同的数据集。对于该系统,发现 MBAR 衍生方法比基于 NBB 的方法产生的总体不确定性更小。此外,我们表明,为了减少该系统中固定数量的 QM/MM 计算中总体自由能差估计的方差,Boltzmann 再加权步骤中的能量重新评估应该集中在与 QM/MM 状态重叠度最高的物理 MM 状态上,而不是平均分配给所有采样的 MM 状态。我们还表明,重新分配 QM/MM 重新评估可以用于诊断采样和目标状态之间的重叠不良。SAMPL4 溶剂化数据集的分子的溶剂化自由能也在 NBB 和 MBAR 下的 QM/MM 哈密顿量中计算,并且 MBAR 的方差略小。总体而言,对于采样效率低的系统,NBB 和 MBAR 产生相似的方差,而对于采样效率高的系统,MBAR 产生的方差比 NBB 小。对于 QM/MM 哈密顿量,NBB 和 MBAR 都收敛到相同的溶剂化自由能估计值,并且当从 MM 哈密顿量切换到 QM/MM 哈密顿量时,SAMPL4 溶剂化数据集的分子的实验值的 RMSD 降低了约 28%。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4bb6/6497519/87a2e57ad7d0/nihms-1019858-f0002.jpg

相似文献

引用本文的文献

1
Machine Learning-Enhanced Calculation of Quantum-Classical Binding Free Energies.机器学习增强的量子-经典结合自由能计算
J Chem Theory Comput. 2025 Aug 26;21(16):8182-8198. doi: 10.1021/acs.jctc.5c00388. Epub 2025 Aug 5.

本文引用的文献

5
Practical Aspects of Free-Energy Calculations: A Review.自由能计算的实际应用:综述
J Chem Theory Comput. 2014 Jul 8;10(7):2632-47. doi: 10.1021/ct500161f. Epub 2014 Jun 6.
6
7
Direct validation of the single step classical to quantum free energy perturbation.
J Phys Chem B. 2015 Jan 22;119(3):1017-25. doi: 10.1021/jp506459v. Epub 2014 Oct 15.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验