1994
DOI: 10.1002/jcc.540150111
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

General parameterization of a reaction field theory combined with the boundary element method

Abstract: We described various technical aspects in applying reaction field theories using continuum models to practical problems. It was investigated how solvent-dependent properties of solute molecules are influenced by the following factors: difference in quantum-chemical description of solutesolvent (continuum dielectric) interaction, difference in values of empirically determinable parameters such as atomic radii to define a size of a cavity created in a dielectric to accommodate a solute, and difference in the sop… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

1995
1995
2007
2007

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 71 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…From a computational point of view, the ab initio QM‐SCRF treatment of large size solutes is still very demanding, which limits the routine application to studies involving large sets of compounds, such as the screening of libraries of druglike compounds. This justifies the development of a variety of QM‐SCRF methods based on the NDDO (MNDO,10 AM1,11 PM3)12 framework 13–26. Specific parametrizations of semiempirical QM‐SCRF methods, including refined descriptions of the solute‐solvent boundary and of the electrostatic and nonelectrostatic components of the solvation‐free energy, have been recently reported, as in the case of the SM5 solvation model developed by Cramer coworkers,27–30 or the semiempirical versions of the MST model developed in our group 31–33…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From a computational point of view, the ab initio QM‐SCRF treatment of large size solutes is still very demanding, which limits the routine application to studies involving large sets of compounds, such as the screening of libraries of druglike compounds. This justifies the development of a variety of QM‐SCRF methods based on the NDDO (MNDO,10 AM1,11 PM3)12 framework 13–26. Specific parametrizations of semiempirical QM‐SCRF methods, including refined descriptions of the solute‐solvent boundary and of the electrostatic and nonelectrostatic components of the solvation‐free energy, have been recently reported, as in the case of the SM5 solvation model developed by Cramer coworkers,27–30 or the semiempirical versions of the MST model developed in our group 31–33…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has been indicated that more satisfactory numerical results are obtained in practice after such renormalization. 14,47,48 However, others have claimed that renormalization has little effect on calculated results 49 or have simply ignored renormalization without comment. 23,38 When applied, charge renormalization has been generally carried out by ad hoc procedures that lack any firm theoretical justification.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These radii generally give accurate hydration free energies when the dielectric continuum approximation is used for the solvent. 44 We have recently shown 42 for 50 small molecules that a combined DFT/DZVPD-BEM approach provides agreement between experimental and theoretical solvation energies better than 1.5 kcal/mol. It should be noted that this value is often the result of compensation of larger errors on the order of 3 kcal/ mol in individual enthalpies and entropies of hydration.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 95%