Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 64 references

Maximum entropy mediated liquid-to-solid nucleation and transition

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A linear bias built from a measured RDF can drive a liquid to crystallize into the structure behind that RDF.

desk verdict Useful paper: sound MaxEnt RDF biasing with a real LAMMPS implementation, but Eq. 29 has a sign error as printed, and the crystallization claims are single-trajectory demonstrations, not nucleation studies. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.17348 v1 pith:3THMJJ55 submitted 2024-11-26 physics.comp-ph cond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.chem-ph

Lars Dammann , Richard Kohns , Patrick Huber , Robert H. Mei{ss}ner This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.comp-phcond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.chem-ph
keywords maximumrelativeentropyradialdistributionfunctionmoleculardynamicscrystallizationnucleationWAXSbiaspotentialpolymorphselection
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to establish that a radial distribution function (RDF), which is routinely obtained from X-ray scattering but is hard to invert into atomic coordinates, can be turned directly into a driving force in a molecular dynamics simulation. The authors derive a linear bias potential $V(R)=\sum_b \hat{\lambda}_b g_b(R)$ from the principle of maximum relative entropy, a rule that picks the least-biased distribution consistent with a set of measured averages, so the biased ensemble reproduces the target RDF while perturbing the original interaction potential as little as possible. They then show the bias works in practice: it transfers the liquid structure of one water model onto another, and it induces liquid-to-solid transitions into specific crystalline states, crystallizing water into ice Ih and liquid TiO2 into rutile or anatase (alternate crystal structures of the same material) depending only on the target RDF. If the method is right, an experimental RDF can act as a structure generator, supplying initial solid configurations that are otherwise hard to prepare, including metastable crystalline forms that annealing-based methods cannot reach.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the maximum-relative-entropy bias $V(R)=\sum_b\hat{\lambda}_b g_b(R)$, a sum over RDF bins with Lagrange multipliers learned on the fly. Its force per pair, $\hat{F}_{ij}=\frac{1}{\Delta}\left(\frac{\hat{\lambda}_{\hat{b}}}{\delta V_{\hat{b}}}-\frac{\hat{\lambda}_{\hat{b}-1}}{\delta V_{\hat{b}-1}}\right)$ (or the analogous expression with $\hat{b}+1$), depends only on the two bins neighboring each interatomic distance, which makes the bias cheap to compute. Because the bias acts through a linear tilt of the free-energy surface $F(g)=F_0(g)+k_B T \lambda g$, it both lowers the crystallization barrier and can make a metastable polymorph the preferred state. The virial contribution of the bias is tracked separately, and the gradient-descent update of the multipliers uses the mismatch $\tilde{g}^{\mathrm{target}}_b-\langle g_b\rangle$, normalized per step.

What would settle it

Take a target RDF that is shared by two different atomic arrangements, for example a crystal and a defective or amorphous structure with the same $g(r)$, and run the same biased protocol twice with different random seeds; if the final structure changes with random seed or does not match the intended polymorph, the claim that the RDF defines the crystallized state fails. A simpler check is to vary only the bias step size $\gamma$ or the virial weight $\kappa_b$ and see whether the same target RDF still selects the same polymorph.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the information in a one-dimensional RDF, combined with the existing force field, is enough to determine the crystalline state the simulation will reach. The algorithm replaces the RDF histogram's delta functions with differentiable rectangular kernels, biases the Boltzmann ensemble with the linear potential above, and updates the Lagrange multipliers $\hat{\lambda}_b$ during the run by gradient descent on the maximum-entropy objective $\Gamma(\lambda)$, with an optional virial-weighting factor to prevent excessive volume changes. Demonstrations show the TIP3P water model reproducing the RDF of TIP4P/2005, with the mean absolute error dropping from 0.058 to 0.016 while the angular distribution error drops from 0.065 to 0.023; liquid water at 360 K and 1 atm crystallizing into hexagonal ice Ih; and liquid TiO2 crystallizing into rutile or the metastable anatase polymorph depending on which RDF is used as target. The resulting crystals contain visible defects, so the achieved structures resemble, rather than exactly equal, the ideal target lattices.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a one-dimensional target radial distribution, together with the original force field, contains enough information to pick out the intended crystalline phase; the paper notes that RDF inversion is ill-posed and its own final crystals show defects, but it does not prove the bias resolves that ambiguity in general.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Liquid interaction models can be improved by biasing them with an RDF from a more accurate model or from experiment; in the water example the RDF error fell by roughly a factor of four.
  • Crystalline structures, including metastable ones, can be generated from a liquid without inserting a seed or choosing collective variables; the target RDF alone selects the polymorph.
  • The bias can stabilize a crystalline phase at temperatures and pressures where it is not the stable phase in the unbiased model, as in water crystallizing at 360 K.
  • The virial of the bias changes system volume; the optional per-bin weighting $\kappa_b$ lets the user suppress excessive contraction of the simulation box.
  • Because the final crystals show defects, the method is a route to near-target, not perfect, crystalline states.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: if the RDF target is not unique, the algorithm might reproducibly drive the simulation into an unintended polymorph or an amorphous state whose RDF matches equally well; testing on deliberately degenerate RDF targets would map how often this happens.
  • Editorial inference: the observed nucleation from a biased liquid suggests the bias trajectory itself samples transition states; configurations harvested near the steep drop in RDF error could seed umbrella sampling or other free-energy calculations without choosing reaction coordinates first.
  • Editorial inference: the same maximum-relative-entropy construction should work with other ensemble observables, such as bond-order parameters or the structure factor $S(q)$ directly, since the derivation only requires an observable expressed as an ensemble average.
  • Editorial inference: feeding experimental WAXS-derived RDFs of unknown or amorphous materials into this bias could generate candidate atomic configurations for machine-learned potentials, effectively turning scattering data into training data.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a maximum relative entropy biasing scheme for MD simulations in which a histogram RDF enters as a linear bias potential V(R) = sum_b lambda_hat_b g_b(R), with Lagrange multipliers updated on the fly. The authors validate the approach by biasing TIP3P water to reproduce the TIP4P/2005 RDF and by biasing liquid water and liquid TiO2 to crystallize into ice Ih, rutile, and anatase, respectively. They also discuss applications to force-field refinement, WAXS interpretation, and machine-learning potential training.

Significance. If the central result holds, the method gives a practical route to translate measured or simulated RDFs into a driving force that can generate crystalline polymorphs, which would be valuable for structure preparation and interpretation of scattering data. The paper reports a quantitative liquid-state transfer (RDF MAE 0.058 to 0.016, ADF MAE 0.065 to 0.023), provides a LAMMPS implementation, and demonstrates distinct polymorph outcomes from the same liquid TiO2 setup. However, the load-bearing sign error in Eq. (29), the internal sign inconsistency between Eqs. (16) and (20), and the reliance on single hand-tuned trajectories for the crystallization claims leave the central claim in need of correction and stronger validation.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 2.3, Eq. (29)] The printed update is gradient ascent, not descent. From Eq. (28), dGamma/dlambda_b = g_target_b - <g_b(R)>, so minimizing Gamma requires lambda'_b = lambda_b - gamma kappa_b (g_target_b - <g_b(R)>) / sum |g_target - <g>|. Eq. (29) has a plus sign, which will increase lambda_b in bins where the target exceeds the current RDF; since the bias enters the Boltzmann factor as exp(-beta U - sum lambda_b g_b), this suppresses those bins and moves the ensemble away from the target. This sign affects every reported simulation, so it must be a typographical error in the manuscript or a fundamental inconsistency; the authors should correct Eq. (29) and state explicitly which sign is used in the LAMMPS code.
  2. [Sec. 2.2, Eqs. (16) and (20)] The force convention is internally inconsistent: Eq. (16) defines the bias force as F_i = grad_i V(R), but Eq. (20) computes hat F_ij from Theta(r_b + Delta/2 - r_ij) - Theta(r_b - Delta/2 - r_ij), which corresponds to -grad_i V(R) given Eq. (17). The correct physical bias force is -grad_i V(R) when V is added to the potential energy. Please reconcile the sign convention and Eq. (16), otherwise readers cannot reproduce the forces from the printed equations.
  3. [Secs. 3.2 and 3.3] The claim that the biased simulations crystallize specifically into ice Ih, rutile, or anatase is supported only by visual snapshots, averaged bond-order order parameters, and RDF matching, each from a single trajectory. Because the paper itself notes in Sec. 1 that RDF inversion is ill-posed, a quantitative polymorph identification (e.g., fraction of atoms with the target coordination, comparison of the full orientationally resolved structure factor against the reference crystal, or a finite-temperature order-parameter distribution) is needed to substantiate the central crystallization claim. Please add such an analysis or temper the conclusion to RDF-compatible crystalline order.
  4. [Secs. 3.1-3.3] All demonstrations are single runs with hand-tuned update parameters (gamma = 10, 2.5, 5.0, 1.25; kappa_b = 1 or 0.25), and no system sizes, thermostat settings, or statistical uncertainties are reported. For a method paper, this is insufficient to establish robustness; at minimum, report system sizes and run-to-run variability, and ideally a small sensitivity scan over gamma and kappa_b.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 2.3] The statement that Gamma(lambda) is not convex because RDF bin intensities are correlated is incorrect: the log-partition function is convex in lambda regardless of correlations, and bin correlations affect the conditioning or rank of the Hessian, not convexity. Please correct this theoretical aside.
  2. [Sec. 2, Eq. (13)] The notation switches between lambda_b and hat lambda_b within the same equation; since hat lambda_b = lambda_b / beta, the first line should use hat lambda_b consistently or define a new symbol.
  3. [Sec. 3.1] The liquid-water transfer test lacks details about system size, equilibration protocol, and the number of independent samples used to compute the MAE; please provide these to make the quantitative comparison reproducible.
  4. [Secs. 3.2 and 3.3] The temperature increase under strong bias is mentioned but not quantified; reporting the temperature drift and thermostat response would help readers assess the robustness of the NPT crystallization runs.
  5. [Sec. 3.3] In the sentence stating that an equilibration period following the Lagrangian parameter update was unnecessary, the word 'Lagrangian' should be 'Lagrange.'

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the maximum-entropy bias is a derived construction, RDF agreement is an explicit fit, and the non-target ADF and phase-transition outcomes supply independent evidence.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The biased ensemble PME(R) = e^(-beta(U+V)) with V = sum_b lambda_hat_b g_b(R) follows by solving the constrained maximum-relative-entropy problem (Eqs. 9-13); the target RDF enters as a constraint, and the Lagrange multipliers are subsequently fitted by the iterative update of Eq. (29), so the reported agreement between biased and target RDF is an optimization result, not a disguised prediction. The paper does not rename this fit as a prediction; it explicitly states the goal is to 'adjust the RDF ... to reproduce the RDF' and reports MAE as a convergence measure. Independent, non-circular content is present: the TIP3P-to-TIP4P/2005 demonstration also evaluates the angular distribution function, which is not constrained by the bias; and the crystallization runs start from liquids and yield structural phase transitions with visible defects, a nontrivial outcome not encoded in the one-dimensional target RDF alone. No load-bearing self-citations occur; the cited maximum-entropy and relative-entropy constructions (Pitera/Chodera, Cesari et al., White/Voth) are external prior work rather than author self-citations. Thus no circular step can be exhibited. The possible sign error in Eq. (29) is a correctness concern, not an input-output equivalence, and does not change the circularity verdict.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method's central derivation is standard maximum entropy biasing. The load-bearing inputs are the hand-chosen optimization parameters, gamma, kappa_b, and bin size, and the assumption that RDF matching plus the original potential uniquely selects the intended polymorph. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • gradient descent step size gamma = 10.0 (TIP3P water), 2.5 (TIP4P/ICE water), 5.0 (TiO2 rutile), 1.25 (TiO2 anatase)
    Chosen by hand per system; affects convergence speed and final structure.
  • virial damping factor kappa_b = 1.0 (water cases), 0.25 (TiO2 for bins with negative virial contribution)
    Ad hoc scaling to prevent excessive volume contraction; varies between systems.
  • RDF bin width Delta = 0.08 Angstrom (TIP3P/TIP4P water, TiO2), 0.07 Angstrom (ice)
    Discretization choice; small bins are needed for the kernel approximation accuracy.
  • Lagrange multipliers lambda_b = not reported; updated online via Eq. (29)
    The bias parameters are fitted during simulation to match the target RDF; their final values are not given.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Maximum relative entropy formalism of Pitera and Chodera
    The biased distribution Eq. (12) follows from maximizing relative entropy under RDF constraints; taken from refs. 30 and 31.
  • domain assumption Rectangular kernel approximation to delta distributions in RDF binning
    Eqs. (4) and (5) replace delta functions with rectangular kernels; accuracy requires sufficiently small bin size, stated without a quantitative bound.
  • ad hoc to paper Gradient descent on Gamma(lambda) converges to the optimal Lagrange multipliers
    Sec. 2.3 admits Gamma is not convex and there is no guarantee of a global minimum; the authors rely on observed convergence in the studied systems.
  • domain assumption Bias-induced virial correction fully accounts for barostat response
    Eqs. (24) to (27) add the bias virial to the total pressure; the kappa_b damping is introduced ad hoc to manage volume changes.
  • domain assumption Target RDFs from small simulation boxes represent the macroscopic phase
    Target RDFs are computed from small equilibrated crystals, ice at 10 K and TiO2 at 300 K, and used to bias liquids; finite-size effects are not analyzed.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Maximum entropy mediated liquid-to-solid nucleation and transition." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3THMJJ55

@misc{pith2026241117348,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Maximum entropy mediated liquid-to-solid nucleation and transition},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3THMJJ55}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.17348}
}
read the original abstract

Molecular Dynamics (MD) simulations are a powerful tool for studying matter at the atomic scale. However, to simulate solids, an initial atomic structure is crucial for the successful execution of MD simulations, but can be difficult to prepare due to insufficient atomistic information. At the same time Wide Angle X-ray Scattering (WAXS) measurements can determine the Radial Distribution Function (RDF) of atomic structures. However, the interpretation of RDFs is often challenging. Here we present an algorithm that can bias MD simulations with RDFs by combining the information of the MD atomic interaction potential and the RDF under the principle of maximum relative entropy. We show that this algorithm can be used to adjust the RDF of one liquid model, e.g., the TIP3P water model, to reproduce the RDF and improve the Angular Distribution Function (ADF) of another model, such as the TIP4P/2005 water model. In addition, we demonstrate that the algorithm can initiate crystallization in liquid systems, leading to both stable and metastable crystalline states defined by the RDF, e.g., crystallization of water to ice and liquid TiO2 to rutile or anatase. Finally, we discuss how this method can be useful for improving interaction models, studying crystallization processes, interpreting measured RDFs, or training machine learned potentials.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.17348 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Sketch of the contribution of each distance rij to the RDF gb. The colored dashed lines represent the original delta distribution δ(ρb −rij ) at rij . We replace the delta distribu￾tions with rectangular kernel functions Θ(ρb − rij ) centered around rij . The contribution of the distance rij to the bin b is defined by the area under the rectangular function in the bin b (lighter color). Due to the extent of the rect… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Hypothetical free energy surface as a function of the RDF intensity gb ′ at one specific bin position rb ′. Two local free energy minima are visible that are separated by a free energy barrier. The resulting Boltzmann probability distribution is indicated by slightly lighter dis￾tributions in the energy minima. An increase of the bias is expressed by the decrease of the La￾grange multiplier λb ′ from λb ′ = 0.0 (dar… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Upper panel: RDF (left) and ADF (right) of liquid water systems modeled with different [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Bias-induced liquid-solid transition of a liquid water system modeled with TIP4P/ICE [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Crystallization of liquid TiO2 to rutile at 2500 K and 1 atm. The mean absolute error (MAE) between the RDF of the biased water system and the target RDF of the simulated rutile is depicted. Several snapshots of the biased simulation, show the state of the titanium ato…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Crystallization of liquid TiO2 to anatase at 2500 K and 1 atm. The mean absolute error (MAE) between the RDF of the biased water system and the target RDF of the simulated anatase is depicted. Several snapshots of the biased simulation, show the state of the titanium a…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    M.; Weis, J.; Panagiotopoulos, A

    Piaggi, P. M.; Weis, J.; Panagiotopoulos, A. Z.; Debenedetti, P. G.; Car, R. Homogeneous ice nucleation in an ab initio machine-learning model of water. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2022, 119, e2207294119, DOI: doi:10.1073/pnas.2207294119

    doi:10.1073/pnas.2207294119 2022

  2. [2]

    C.; Michaelides, A

    Pedevilla, P.; Fitzner, M.; Sosso, G. C.; Michaelides, A. Heterogeneous seeded molecular dynamics as a tool to probe the ice nucleating ability of crystalline surfaces. J. Chem. Phys. 2018, 149, 072327, DOI: doi:10.1063/1.5029336

    work page doi:10.1063/1.5029336 2018

  3. [3]

    C.; Tribello, G

    Sosso, G. C.; Tribello, G. A.; Zen, A.; Pedevilla, P.; Michaelides, A. Ice formation on kaolinite: Insights from molecular dynamics simulations. The Journal of Chemical Physics 2016, 145, 211927, DOI: doi:10.1063/1.4968796

    work page doi:10.1063/1.4968796 2016

  4. [4]

    R.; Caballero-Bernal, R.; Abascal, J

    Sanz, E.; Vega, C.; Espinosa, J. R.; Caballero-Bernal, R.; Abascal, J. L. F.; Valeriani, C. Homogeneous Ice Nucleation at Moderate Supercooling from Molecular Simulation . J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2013, 135, 15008--15017, DOI: doi:10.1021/ja4028814

    work page doi:10.1021/ja4028814 2013

  5. [5]

    R.; Vega, C.; Valeriani, C.; Sanz, E

    Espinosa, J. R.; Vega, C.; Valeriani, C.; Sanz, E. Seeding approach to crystal nucleation. J. Chem. Phys. 2016, 144, 034501, DOI: doi:10.1063/1.4939641

    doi:10.1063/1.4939641 2016

  6. [6]

    Biswas, R.; Hamann, D. R. Simulated annealing of silicon atom clusters in Langevin molecular dynamics. Phys. Rev. B 1986, 34, 895--901, DOI: doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.34.895

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.34.895 1986

  7. [7]

    Investigating the crystallization behavior of TiO2 during annealing: Molecular dynamics simulations

    Zhang, S.; Wu, Y. Investigating the crystallization behavior of TiO2 during annealing: Molecular dynamics simulations. AIP Advances 2023, 13, 085226, DOI: doi:10.1063/5.0165728

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0165728 2023

  8. [8]

    M.; Panagiotopoulos, A

    Piaggi, P. M.; Panagiotopoulos, A. Z.; Debenedetti, P. G.; Car, R. Phase Equilibrium of Water with Hexagonal and Cubic Ice Using the SCAN Functional . J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2021, 17, 3065--3077, DOI: doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00041

    doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00041 2021

Show all 64 references
  1. [9]

    A.; Ceriotti, M

    Cheng, B.; Tribello, G. A.; Ceriotti, M. The Gibbs free energy of homogeneous nucleation: From atomistic nuclei to the planar limit. J. Chem. Phys. 2017, 147, 104707, DOI: doi:10.1063/1.4997180

    2017 doi

  2. [10]

    M.; Invernizzi, M.; Parrinello, M

    Niu, H.; Piaggi, P. M.; Invernizzi, M.; Parrinello, M. Molecular dynamics simulations of liquid silica crystallization. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2018, 115, 5348--5352, DOI: doi:10.1073/pnas.1803919115

    2018 doi

  3. [11]

    Metadynamics studies of crystal nucleation

    Giberti, F.; Salvalaglio, M.; Parrinello, M. Metadynamics studies of crystal nucleation. IUCrJ 2015, 2, 256--266, DOI: doi:10.1107/S2052252514027626

    2015 doi

  4. [12]

    Silicon Liquid Structure and Crystal Nucleation from Ab Initio Deep Metadynamics

    Bonati, L.; Parrinello, M. Silicon Liquid Structure and Crystal Nucleation from Ab Initio Deep Metadynamics . Phys. Rev. Lett. 2018, 121, 265701, DOI: doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.265701

    2018 doi

  5. [13]

    A.; Tribello, G

    Gobbo, G.; Bellucci, M. A.; Tribello, G. A.; Ciccotti, G.; Trout, B. L. Nucleation of Molecular Crystals Driven by Relative Information Entropy . J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2018, 14, 959--972, DOI: doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.7b01027

    2018 doi

  6. [14]

    Improving collective variables: The case of crystallization

    Zhang, Y.-Y.; Niu, H.; Piccini, G.; Mendels, D.; Parrinello, M. Improving collective variables: The case of crystallization. J. Chem. Phys. 2019, 150, 094509, DOI: doi:10.1063/1.5081040

    2019 doi

  7. [15]

    Pathways for the formation of ice polymorphs from water predicted by a metadynamics method

    Nada, H. Pathways for the formation of ice polymorphs from water predicted by a metadynamics method. Sci Rep 2020, 10, 4708, DOI: doi:10.1038/s41598-020-61773-x

    2020 doi

  8. [16]

    M.; Valleau, J

    Torrie, G. M.; Valleau, J. P. Nonphysical sampling distributions in Monte Carlo free-energy estimation: Umbrella sampling. Journal of Computational Physics 1977, 23, 187--199, DOI: doi:10.1016/0021-9991(77)90121-8

    1977 doi

  9. [17]

    Well- Tempered Metadynamics : A Smoothly Converging and Tunable Free - Energy Method

    Barducci, A.; Bussi, G.; Parrinello, M. Well- Tempered Metadynamics : A Smoothly Converging and Tunable Free - Energy Method . Phys. Rev. Lett. 2008, 100, 020603, DOI: doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.020603

    2008 doi

  10. [18]

    K.; Gubbins, K

    Coasne, B.; Jain, S. K.; Gubbins, K. E. Freezing of Fluids Confined in a Disordered Nanoporous Structure . Phys. Rev. Lett. 2006, 97, 105702, DOI: doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.105702

    2006 doi

  11. [19]

    R.; Coasne, B.; Santiso, E

    Hung, F. R.; Coasne, B.; Santiso, E. E.; Gubbins, K. E.; Siperstein, F. R.; Sliwinska-Bartkowiak, M. Molecular modeling of freezing of simple fluids confined within carbon nanotubes. J. Chem. Phys. 2005, 122, 144706, DOI: doi:10.1063/1.1881072

    2005 doi

  12. [20]

    On the Gibbs – Thomson equation for the crystallization of confined fluids

    Scalfi, L.; Coasne, B.; Rotenberg, B. On the Gibbs – Thomson equation for the crystallization of confined fluids. The Journal of Chemical Physics 2021, 154, 114711, DOI: doi:10.1063/5.0044330

    2021 doi

  13. [21]

    Isobaric Molecular Dynamics Version of the Generalized Replica Exchange Method ( gREM ): Liquid – Vapor Equilibrium

    Małolepsza, E.; Secor, M.; Keyes, T. Isobaric Molecular Dynamics Version of the Generalized Replica Exchange Method ( gREM ): Liquid – Vapor Equilibrium . J. Phys. Chem. B 2015, 119, 13379--13384, DOI: doi:10.1021/acs.jpcb.5b07614

    2015 doi

  14. [22]

    Generalized ensemble method applied to study systems with strong first order transitions

    Małolepsza, E.; Kim, J.; Keyes, T. Generalized ensemble method applied to study systems with strong first order transitions. J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 2015, 640, 012003, DOI: doi:10.1088/1742-6596/640/1/012003

    2015 doi

  15. [23]

    Water Freezing and Ice Melting

    Małolepsza, E.; Keyes, T. Water Freezing and Ice Melting . J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2015, 11, 5613--5623, DOI: doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.5b00637

    2015 doi

  16. [24]

    Egami, T.; Billinge, S. J. L. Underneath the Bragg Peaks : Structural Analysis of Complex Materials ; Elsevier Science, 2012

    2012

  17. [25]

    L.; Pusztai, L

    Mcgreevy, R. L.; Pusztai, L. Reverse Monte Carlo Simulation : A New Technique for the Determination of Disordered Structures . Molecular Simulation 1988, 1, 359--367, DOI: doi:10.1080/08927028808080958

    1988 doi

  18. [26]

    McGreevy, R. L. Reverse Monte Carlo modelling. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 2001, 13, R877, DOI: doi:10.1088/0953-8984/13/46/201

    2001 doi

  19. [27]

    A.; Tucker, M

    Keen, D. A.; Tucker, M. G.; Dove, M. T. Reverse Monte Carlo modelling of crystalline disorder. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 2005, 17, S15, DOI: doi:10.1088/0953-8984/17/5/002

    2005 doi

  20. [28]

    J.-M.; Coasne, B

    Bousige, C.; Boţan, A.; Ulm, F.-J.; Pellenq, R. J.-M.; Coasne, B. Optimized molecular reconstruction procedure combining hybrid reverse Monte Carlo and molecular dynamics. J. Chem. Phys. 2015, 142, 114112, DOI: doi:10.1063/1.4914921

    2015 doi

  21. [29]

    H.; Bhatia, S

    Farmahini, A. H.; Bhatia, S. K. Hybrid Reverse Monte Carlo simulation of amorphous carbon: Distinguishing between competing structures obtained using different modeling protocols. Carbon 2015, 83, 53--70, DOI: doi:10.1016/j.carbon.2014.11.013

    2015 doi

  22. [30]

    W.; Chodera, J

    Pitera, J. W.; Chodera, J. D. On the Use of Experimental Observations to Bias Simulated Ensembles . J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2012, 8, 3445--3451, DOI: doi:10.1021/ct300112v

    2012 doi

  23. [31]

    Using the Maximum Entropy Principle to Combine Simulations and Solution Experiments

    Cesari, A.; Reißer, S.; Bussi, G. Using the Maximum Entropy Principle to Combine Simulations and Solution Experiments . Computation 2018, 6, 15, DOI: doi:10.3390/computation6010015

    2018 doi

  24. [32]

    Shell, M. S. The relative entropy is fundamental to multiscale and inverse thermodynamic problems. J. Chem. Phys. 2008, 129, 144108, DOI: doi:10.1063/1.2992060

    2008 doi

  25. [33]

    Shell, M. S. Advances in Chemical Physics ; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2016; pp 395--441, DOI: doi:10.1002/9781119290971.ch5

    2016 doi

  26. [34]

    Chaimovich, A.; Shell, M. S. Coarse-graining errors and numerical optimization using a relative entropy framework. J. Chem. Phys. 2011, 134, 094112, DOI: doi:10.1063/1.3557038

    2011 doi

  27. [35]

    Combining Simulations and Solution Experiments as a Paradigm for RNA Force Field Refinement

    Cesari, A.; Gil-Ley, A.; Bussi, G. Combining Simulations and Solution Experiments as a Paradigm for RNA Force Field Refinement . J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2016, 12, 6192--6200, DOI: doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.6b00944

    2016 doi

  28. [36]

    Toward empirical force fields that match experimental observables

    Fröhlking, T.; Bernetti, M.; Calonaci, N.; Bussi, G. Toward empirical force fields that match experimental observables. J. Chem. Phys. 2020, 152, 230902, DOI: doi:10.1063/5.0011346

    2020 doi

  29. [37]

    Relative entropy minimization and the determination of pair interactions

    Cilloco, F. Relative entropy minimization and the determination of pair interactions. Journal of Molecular Structure 1993, 296, 253--258, DOI: doi:10.1016/0022-2860(93)80140-Q

    1993 doi

  30. [38]

    D.; Voth, G

    White, A. D.; Voth, G. A. Efficient and Minimal Method to Bias Molecular Simulations with Experimental Data . J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2014, 10, 3023--3030, DOI: doi:10.1021/ct500320c

    2014 doi

  31. [39]

    D.; Dama, J

    White, A. D.; Dama, J. F.; Voth, G. A. Designing Free Energy Surfaces That Match Experimental Data with Metadynamics . J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2015, 11, 2451--2460, DOI: doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.5b00178

    2015 doi

  32. [40]

    E.; Krutter, H.; Morningstar, O

    Warren, B. E.; Krutter, H.; Morningstar, O. FOURIER ANALYSIS OF X - RAY PATTERNS OF VITREOUS SiO2 AND B2O2 *. Journal of the American Ceramic Society 1936, 19, 202--206, DOI: doi:10.1111/j.1151-2916.1936.tb19822.x

    1936

  33. [41]

    The mathematics of the ensemble theory

    Gao, X. The mathematics of the ensemble theory. Results in Physics 2022, 34, 105230, DOI: doi:10.1016/j.rinp.2022.105230

    2022

  34. [42]

    Relative Entropy and Inductive Inference

    Caticha, A. Relative Entropy and Inductive Inference . AIP Conf. Proc. 2004, 707, 75--96, DOI: doi:10.1063/1.1751358

    2004 doi

  35. [43]

    The nature of the calculation of the pressure in molecular simulations of continuous models from volume perturbations

    de Miguel, E.; Jackson, G. The nature of the calculation of the pressure in molecular simulations of continuous models from volume perturbations. J. Chem. Phys. 2006, 125, 164109, DOI: doi:10.1063/1.2363381

    2006 doi

  36. [44]

    R.; Papanicolaou, N

    Mead, L. R.; Papanicolaou, N. Maximum entropy in the problem of moments. J. Math. Phys. 1984, 25, 2404--2417, DOI: doi:10.1063/1.526446

    1984 doi

  37. [45]

    P.; Aktulga, H

    Thompson, A. P.; Aktulga, H. M.; Berger, R.; Bolintineanu, D. S.; Brown, W. M.; Crozier, P. S.; in 't Veld, P. J.; Kohlmeyer, A.; Moore, S. G.; Nguyen, T. D.; Shan, R.; Stevens, M. J.; Tranchida, J.; Trott, C.; Plimpton, S. J. LAMMPS - a flexible simulation tool for particle-b...

    2022

  38. [46]

    P.; Sichani, M

    Coleman, S. P.; Sichani, M. M.; Spearot, D. E. A Computational Algorithm to Produce Virtual X -ray and Electron Diffraction Patterns from Atomistic Simulations . JOM 2014, 66, 408--416, DOI: doi:10.1007/s11837-013-0829-3

    2014 doi

  39. [47]

    International tables for crystallography

    Prince, E., Ed. International tables for crystallography. C : Mathematical , physical and chemical tables / Hrsg . E . Prince , 3rd ed.; Springer Netherland: Berlin, 2007; DOI: doi:10.1107/97809553602060000103

    2007 doi

  40. [48]

    M.; Ren, G.; Dudarev, S

    Peng, L. M.; Ren, G.; Dudarev, S. L.; Whelan, M. J. Robust Parameterization of Elastic and Absorptive Electron Atomic Scattering Factors . Acta Cryst 1996, 52, 257--276, DOI: doi:10.1107/S0108767395014371

    1996 doi

  41. [49]

    L.; Chandrasekhar, J.; Madura, J

    Jorgensen, W. L.; Chandrasekhar, J.; Madura, J. D.; Impey, R. W.; Klein, M. L. Comparison of simple potential functions for simulating liquid water. J. Chem. Phys. 1983, 79, 926--935, DOI: doi:10.1063/1.445869

    1983 doi

  42. [50]

    L.; Vega, C

    Abascal, J. L.; Vega, C. A general purpose model for the condensed phases of water: TIP4P /2005. J. Chem. Phys. 2005, 123, 234505, DOI: doi:10.1063/1.2121687

    2005 doi

  43. [51]

    P.; Meftahi, N.; Elbourne, A.; Weiss, A

    Kadaoluwa Pathirannahalage, S. P.; Meftahi, N.; Elbourne, A.; Weiss, A. C. G.; McConville, C. F.; Padua, A.; Winkler, D. A.; Costa Gomes, M.; Greaves, T. L.; Le, T. C.; Besford, Q. A.; Christofferson, A. J. Systematic Comparison of the Structural and Dynamic Properties of Comm...

    2021 doi

  44. [52]

    A Comparative Study of TIP4P -2005, SPC / E , SPC , and TIP3P - Ew Models for Predicting Water Transport Coefficients Using EMD and NEMD Simulations

    Dorrani, H.; Mohebbi, A. A Comparative Study of TIP4P -2005, SPC / E , SPC , and TIP3P - Ew Models for Predicting Water Transport Coefficients Using EMD and NEMD Simulations . J. Engin. Thermophys. 2023, 32, 138--161, DOI: doi:10.1134/S1810232823010113

    2005 doi

  45. [53]

    Abascal, J. L. F.; Sanz, E.; García Fernández, R.; Vega, C. A potential model for the study of ices and amorphous water: TIP4P / Ice . J. Chem. Phys. 2005, 122, 234511, DOI: doi:10.1063/1.1931662

    2005 doi

  46. [54]

    VMD : Visual molecular dynamics

    Humphrey, W.; Dalke, A.; Schulten, K. VMD : Visual molecular dynamics. Journal of Molecular Graphics 1996, 14, 33--38, DOI: doi:10.1016/0263-7855(96)00018-5

    1996 doi

  47. [55]

    Accurate determination of crystal structures based on averaged local bond order parameters

    Lechner, W.; Dellago, C. Accurate determination of crystal structures based on averaged local bond order parameters. J. Chem. Phys. 2008, 129, 114707, DOI: doi:10.1063/1.2977970

    2008 doi

  48. [56]

    J.; Nelson, D

    Steinhardt, P. J.; Nelson, D. R.; Ronchetti, M. Bond-orientational order in liquids and glasses. 28, 784--805, DOI: doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.28.784

    doi

  49. [57]

    Water Splitting on Rutile TiO2 - Based Photocatalysts

    Miyoshi, A.; Nishioka, S.; Maeda, K. Water Splitting on Rutile TiO2 - Based Photocatalysts . Chemistry – A European Journal 2018, 24, 18204--18219, DOI: doi:10.1002/chem.201800799

    2018 doi

  50. [58]

    Hanaor, D. A. H.; Sorrell, C. C. Review of the anatase to rutile phase transformation. J Mater Sci 2011, 46, 855--874, DOI: doi:10.1007/s10853-010-5113-0

    2011 doi

  51. [59]

    T.; Glowacka-Sobotta, A.; Stanisz, B.; Goslinski, T.; Sobotta, L

    Ziental, D.; Czarczynska-Goslinska, B.; Mlynarczyk, D. T.; Glowacka-Sobotta, A.; Stanisz, B.; Goslinski, T.; Sobotta, L. Titanium Dioxide Nanoparticles : Prospects and Applications in Medicine . Nanomaterials 2020, 10, 387, DOI: doi:10.3390/nano10020387

    2020 doi

  52. [60]

    Titanium Dioxide Nanomaterials for Sensor Applications

    Bai, J.; Zhou, B. Titanium Dioxide Nanomaterials for Sensor Applications . Chem. Rev. 2014, 114, 10131--10176, DOI: doi:10.1021/cr400625j

    2014 doi

  53. [61]

    Molecular Dynamics Simulation of the Structural and Physical Properties of the Four Polymorphs of TiO2

    Matsui, M.; Akaogi, M. Molecular Dynamics Simulation of the Structural and Physical Properties of the Four Polymorphs of TiO2 . Molecular Simulation 1991, 6, 239--244, DOI: doi:10.1080/08927029108022432

    1991 doi

  54. [62]

    B.; Elliott, R

    Tadmor, E. B.; Elliott, R. S.; Sethna, J. P.; Miller, R. E.; Becker, C. A. The potential of atomistic simulations and the knowledgebase of interatomic models. JOM 2011, 63, 17--17, DOI: doi:10.1007/s11837-011-0102-6

    2011 doi

  55. [63]

    Chen, C.; Ong, S. P. A universal graph deep learning interatomic potential for the periodic table. Nat Comput Sci 2022, 2, 718--728, DOI: doi:10.1038/s43588-022-00349-3

    2022 doi

  56. [64]

    M.; Kovács, D

    Batatia, I.; Benner, P.; Chiang, Y.; Elena, A. M.; Kovács, D. P.; Riebesell, J.; Advincula, X. R.; Asta, M.; Avaylon, M.; Baldwin, W. J.; Berger, F.; Bernstein, N.; Bhowmik, A.; Blau, S. M.; Cărare, V.; Darby, J. P.; De, S.; Pia, F. D.; Deringer, V. L.; Elijošius, R.; El-Macha...

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.