Page Comparison

Simpler Fits

Simple_fit1

Replacing t43, t44, t45 with an interpolated torsion parameter for the smarts pattern: “[*:1]~[#6X3:2]~[#6X3:3]~[*:4]” and fitting this FF to 170 targets from 14 datasets (listed below under fit0) that have a dihedral that matches this pattern. The objective function value is compared to the zeroth iteration of various other FFs and fits:

Fit7

With slight changes to Fit4, TIG0 is converted to an interpolated parameter, and TIG1a and TIG1b are removed. Number of targets 928. Starting parameters are from simple_fit1 and fit4 values. Here are the parameters optimized:

['TIG0', 'TIG1c', 'TIG1d', 'TIG2', 'TIG3', 'TIG4', 'TIG5a', 'TIG5b', 'TIG6', 'TIG7', 'TIG8'] - interpolated

Fit4: Parameters optimized

• ['TIG0', 'TIG1a', 'TIG1b'] - General torsions

• ['TIG1c', 'TIG1d', 'TIG2', 'TIG3', 'TIG4', 'TIG5a', 'TIG5b', 'TIG6', 'TIG7', 'TIG8'] - interpolated

On the training set the objective function values are:

Fit4.1: For each of the interpolated parameter a general torsion parameter is created where the central bond can be a single, aromatic or double bond (denoted by letters p,q,r at the end of parameter id). Due to lack of enough training data that match those patterns only a subset of those are trained and here are the parameters optimized.

Parameters optimized

• ['TIG0', ‘TIG1a', ‘TIG1b',
  ‘TIG3p’, ‘TIG3r', ‘TIG4p', ‘TIG5ap’, ‘TIG5bp’, ‘TIG1cp’, ‘TIG6p’, ‘TIG7p’, ‘TIG8p’, ‘TIG2p’, 'TIG2r’, 'TIG1dp’ ] - General torsions

Fit 0

Input FF:

...

Fit0 is better than 1.3.0 from the objective function values in the above table. Among CN and CC central bonds, CN has a lower objective function value and thus effect of CC is more dominant on the overall objective function.

Some of the better looking TD curves are:

...

SMILES

...

QM Vs MM

...

Structure

...

COc1cccnc1-n1cccn1

...

...

...

CC(=O)Nc1cccs1

...

...

...

CN(C)c1ccccc1-c1ccccn1

...

...

Comparing MM Fits 0, 3 and 1.3.0 with QM

Fit 0 with all the TIG* parameters, and fit 3 is the non-interpolated version i.e., interpolated TIG params split into single, double and aromatic terms, compared with 1.3.0_unconstrained, and QM data.

...

Comparison is done on the training set of molecules, removing the ones with in-ring torsions and sorting the table based on the average of absolute difference in conformer energies between QM and MM_fit0. A full list of molecules sorted in ascending order of (QM - MM_fit0) can be seen at https://github.com/MobleyLab/wbointerpolation/blob/main/compare_forcefields.

File:

ipynb

Here is a list of top 5 molecules that are in very good agreement with the QM energies for the fit0 interpolated parameters FF:

Torsion ID

Avg. abs(QM - MM_fit0) kcal/mol

Avg. abs(QM - MM_fit3) kcal/mol

Avg. abs(QM - MM_1.3.0) kcal/mol

Chemical Structure

QM-MM relative energies

Structure

TIG1a

Image Removed

Image Removed

TIG1a

Image Removed

Image Removed

TIG3

Image Removed

Image Removed

TIG6

Image Removed

Image Removed

TIG1b

Image Removed

Image Removed

t104

Image Removed

Image Removed

TIG1a

Image RemovedImage Removed

TIG3

Image Removed

Image Removed

TIG1a

Image Removed

Image Removed

TIG4

Image Removed

Image Removed

TIG1a

Image Removed

Image Removed

TIG1b

Image Removed

Image Removed

TIG1b

Image Removed

Image Removed

TIG4

Image Removed

Image Removed

TIG3

Image Removed

Image Removed

TIG4

Image Removed

Image Removed

TIG3

Image Removed

Image Removed

TIG7

Image Removed

Image Removed

TIG3

Image Removed

Image Removed

TIG1a

Image Removed

Image Removed

t58

Image Removed

Image Removed

491	{'tid': '1762178', 'assigned_params': {'fit0': 'TIG3', 'fit3': 'TIG3p', 'openff_unconstrained-1.3.0': 't47'}}	0.023835	0.405296	0.866851	Image Added	Image Added
6	{'tid': '21272427', 'assigned_params': {'fit0': 'TIG4', 'fit3': 'TIG4p', 'openff_unconstrained-1.3.0': 't43'}}	0.051240	0.397015	0.125842	Image Added	Image Added
76	{'tid': '21272438', 'assigned_params': {'fit0': 'TIG5b', 'fit3': 'TIG5bp', 'openff_unconstrained-1.3.0': 't43'}}	0.062916	0.274251	0.597345	Image Added	Image Added
628	{'tid': '21272422', 'assigned_params': {'fit0': 'TIG5b', 'fit3': 'TIG5bp', 'openff_unconstrained-1.3.0': 't43'}}	0.070763	9.416926	0.761913	Image Added	Image Added
626	{'tid': '21540566', 'assigned_params': {'fit0': 'TIG4', 'fit3': 'TIG4p', 'openff_unconstrained-1.3.0': 't43'}}	0.075898	0.410239	0.109622	Image Added	Image Added

Here is a list of last 5 molecules that have a higher difference in averaged MM energy with fit0 compared to QM:

	Torsion ID	Avg. abs(QM - MM_fit0) kcal/mol	Avg. abs(QM - MM_fit3) kcal/mol	Avg. abs(QM - MM_1.3.0) kcal/mol	Chemical Structure	QM-MM relative energies
573	{'tid': '2703638', 'assigned_params': {'fit0': 'TIG3', 'fit3': 'TIG3p', 'openff_unconstrained-1.3.0': 't48'}}	5.264862	4.419863	4.908392	Image Added	Image Added
121	{'tid': '2703078', 'assigned_params': {'fit0': 'TIG2', 'fit3': 'TIG2r', 'openff_unconstrained-1.3.0': 't77'}}	5.694254	6.126509	6.142370	Image Added	Image Added
832	{'tid': '4269709', 'assigned_params': {'fit0': 'TIG3', 'fit3': 'TIG3p', 'openff_unconstrained-1.3.0': 't43'}}	6.086503	8.061331	6.024023	Image Added	Image Added
812	{'tid': '21272420', 'assigned_params': {'fit0': 'TIG4', 'fit3': 'TIG4p', 'openff_unconstrained-1.3.0': 't47'}}	6.263980	6.102699	6.772570	Image Added	Image Added
532	{'tid': '19953581', 'assigned_params': {'fit0': 'TIG3', 'fit3': 'TIG3p', 'openff_unconstrained-1.3.0': 't43'}}	6.369817	7.591619	5.529416	Image Added	Image Added