pith. sign in

arxiv: 2511.11859 · v3 · submitted 2025-11-14 · ⚛️ physics.chem-ph · cond-mat.soft· physics.comp-ph

Martini Mapper: An Automated Fragment-Based Framework for Developing Coarse-Grained Models within the Martini 3 Framework

Kevin V. Bigting , Shubhadeep Nag , Yaxin An This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-17 21:46 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.chem-ph cond-mat.softphysics.comp-ph
keywords Martini 3coarse-grained modelingautomated mappingSMILES stringstransfer free energiesmolecular dynamicsfragment-based frameworkhigh-throughput simulation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Martini Mapper builds accurate coarse-grained models for over six thousand molecules straight from their SMILES strings.

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

The paper presents an automated workflow that converts SMILES representations into Martini 3 coarse-grained models by pairing a fixed bead dictionary with a hierarchical set of mapping rules and a few molecule-specific bonded terms. This removes the need for case-by-case manual decisions that have previously restricted how widely the force field could be applied to new chemistry. The authors demonstrate the method on 6,280 compounds drawn from six different datasets and validate a curated subset of 1,075 structures against measured transfer free energies between water and organic solvents. The same workflow also handles molecules as large as 172 heavy atoms, a size range that existing automated tools could not reach. If the mappings remain reliable, researchers gain a practical route to high-throughput coarse-grained simulations across chemically diverse libraries.

Core claim

Martini Mapper combines a curated bead dictionary with a hierarchical, rule-based algorithm and molecule-specific bonded parameters to generate Martini 3 models directly from SMILES strings. Applied to 6,280 molecules across six chemically diverse datasets, the workflow produced 1,689 structures that include explicit bond and angle terms plus additional large systems treated at the topological level. Benchmarks on 1,075 curated mappings show transfer free energies in hydrated octanol, hexadecane, and chloroform that agree with available experimental and atomistic reference data, while solvent-accessible surface area checks provide further structural confirmation. The same procedure extends,

What carries the argument

Martini Mapper, a fragment-based algorithm that consults a curated bead dictionary and applies hierarchical mapping rules to produce Martini 3 bead assignments and bonded parameters from SMILES input.

If this is right

  • Coarse-grained models become feasible for libraries containing thousands of distinct organic compounds without prohibitive manual effort.
  • Molecules up to 172 heavy atoms can now receive consistent Martini 3 mappings at the topological level.
  • High-throughput screening of solvation and partitioning behavior across many chemical classes is enabled by direct SMILES-to-model conversion.
  • Structural consistency is supported by solvent-accessible surface area comparisons that align with atomistic references.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same rule set could be extended to generate initial models for polymers or supramolecular assemblies once bonded-parameter rules for those cases are added.
  • Rapid generation of models for untested functional groups would let experimentalists check whether a proposed coarse-grained representation reproduces observed phase behavior before any simulation is run.
  • If the bead dictionary is kept public, community contributions of new fragments could steadily enlarge the chemical space covered without re-deriving the entire mapping logic.

Load-bearing premise

The curated bead dictionary and hierarchical rule-based algorithm produce accurate, transferable mappings for diverse chemical structures with only molecule-specific bonded parameters and without extensive manual overrides or unaccounted context-dependent exceptions.

What would settle it

A new collection of molecules outside the training sets where the automated mappings yield transfer free energies that deviate by more than the reported agreement margin from both experimental values and atomistic reference simulations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.11859 by Kevin V. Bigting, Shubhadeep Nag, Yaxin An.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The flowchart of our automated coarse-grained mapping pipeline. The process [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (a) Chemical structure of methyl 3-furancarboxylate. (b) Tokenization of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Mapping of representative molecules. (a) Quinoline is treated by the algorithm as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The distribution of successfully mapped molecules with varying heavy-atom counts [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of simulated versus experimental ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (a) Schematic overview of the iterative bead-tuning algorithm. Each cycle begins [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Correlation between simulated and experimental log [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Coarse-graining (CG) reduces molecular details to extend the time and length scales of molecular dynamics simulations to microseconds and micrometers. However, the CG approaches have long been limited by the difficulty of constructing both accurate and transferable models efficiently, considering the large diversity of chemical structures of materials. Among CG force fields, Martini is the most widely used, as it retains essential chemical features while offering substantial computational efficiency. Its most recent version, Martini 3, expands chemical resolution through a much broader bead set, particularly for small molecules. However, this flexibility also complicates the mapping of organic molecules because of context-dependent rules and the lack of standardized procedures. To address this issue, we present an automated framework that builds Martini 3 models directly from SMILES (Simplified Molecular Input Line Entry System) strings by combining a curated bead dictionary with a hierarchical, rule-based algorithm and molecule-specific bonded parameters. Our framework, Martini Mapper https://github.com/eliobaby/Martini_mapper, generated Martini 3 models for 6,280 molecules across six chemically diverse datasets, including 1,689 systems with bond/angle parameters and additional large systems mapped at the topological level. A curated subset of 1,075 mapped structures was benchmarked using transfer free energies in hydrated octanol, hexadecane, and chloroform from water against reference data wherever available. We further examined the benchmark with structural validation via SASA, yielding good agreement with experimental and atomistic reference data. The workflow can also map large molecules containing up to 172 heavy atoms, exceeding the capabilities of existing automated approaches. Our framework, therefore, enables Martini 3 structures for high-throughput simulations.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces Martini Mapper, an automated framework that constructs Martini 3 coarse-grained models directly from SMILES strings by combining a curated bead dictionary, a hierarchical rule-based mapping algorithm, and molecule-specific bonded parameters. The framework was used to generate models for 6,280 molecules across six chemically diverse datasets (including 1,689 systems with explicit bond/angle parameters and additional large systems handled at the topological level only). A curated subset of 1,075 mapped structures was benchmarked via transfer free energies in hydrated octanol, hexadecane, and chloroform (from water) against available experimental and atomistic reference data, together with SASA comparisons, yielding reported good agreement. The work claims the approach can map molecules containing up to 172 heavy atoms, thereby exceeding the capabilities of existing automated Martini mapping tools.

Significance. If the reported performance generalizes beyond the curated benchmark set, the framework would constitute a useful contribution by enabling high-throughput generation of Martini 3 models for diverse organic molecules, including larger systems. The open GitHub repository supporting external reproducibility of the mapping procedure is a clear strength that facilitates community testing and extension.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and benchmarking results section] Abstract and benchmarking results section: transfer free energies and SASA validation are reported exclusively for the curated subset of 1,075 structures. The central claim that the workflow exceeds existing automated approaches by mapping large molecules (up to 172 heavy atoms) at the topological level is not accompanied by corresponding quantitative benchmarks for those systems; topological-only mappings omit bonded terms whose absence can affect conformational sampling and effective interactions in Martini 3, making this a load-bearing gap for the performance assertion.
  2. [Methods and results sections] Methods and results sections: the manuscript provides insufficient detail on the selection criteria used to curate the 1,075-structure benchmark subset from the full 6,280-molecule collection, on the distinction between directly available reference values versus interpolated ones, and on the reporting of error bars or statistical tests supporting the 'good agreement' statement. These omissions limit evaluation of the robustness of the validation.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Methods section] The description of the hierarchical rule-based algorithm would be clearer with the addition of a flowchart or pseudocode in the methods section or supplementary information.
  2. [Methods section] A supplementary table listing the full curated bead dictionary and explicit mapping rules for common functional groups would improve transparency and ease of use for readers.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive review and positive assessment of the potential utility of Martini Mapper. We address each major comment below, indicating where revisions will be made to the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and benchmarking results section] Abstract and benchmarking results section: transfer free energies and SASA validation are reported exclusively for the curated subset of 1,075 structures. The central claim that the workflow exceeds existing automated approaches by mapping large molecules (up to 172 heavy atoms) at the topological level is not accompanied by corresponding quantitative benchmarks for those systems; topological-only mappings omit bonded terms whose absence can affect conformational sampling and effective interactions in Martini 3, making this a load-bearing gap for the performance assertion.

    Authors: We agree that quantitative validation through transfer free energies and SASA is confined to the 1,075-molecule curated subset where reference data exist. For systems up to 172 heavy atoms, the framework generates topological mappings without bonded parameters, which enables mapping of larger molecules than prior automated tools but omits terms that can influence sampling and interactions. This constitutes a genuine limitation in supporting the full performance claim for those systems. In revision we will explicitly note this gap in the abstract and discussion, clarify that the 'exceeding capabilities' statement refers to mapping reach rather than validated accuracy, and indicate that bonded parameters can be supplied by users or future extensions when needed. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Methods and results sections] Methods and results sections: the manuscript provides insufficient detail on the selection criteria used to curate the 1,075-structure benchmark subset from the full 6,280-molecule collection, on the distinction between directly available reference values versus interpolated ones, and on the reporting of error bars or statistical tests supporting the 'good agreement' statement. These omissions limit evaluation of the robustness of the validation.

    Authors: We will revise the Methods and Results sections to supply the missing details. This includes explicit selection criteria for the 1,075-molecule subset (e.g., availability of experimental or atomistic data, chemical diversity, and size filters), clarification of which reference values are taken directly from literature versus any interpolations, and addition of error bars together with quantitative statistical measures such as mean absolute deviations and correlation coefficients to substantiate the agreement statements. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation is rule-based and externally validated

full rationale

The paper presents an algorithmic framework that applies a curated bead dictionary and hierarchical rules to map SMILES strings to Martini 3 CG models, generating outputs for 6280 molecules. A subset of 1075 structures receives benchmarking against independent experimental transfer free energies (in octanol, hexadecane, chloroform) and atomistic SASA references. These checks are external to the mapping rules themselves, which are defined explicitly rather than fitted or derived from the benchmark outcomes. No self-definitional steps, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the derivation chain from input SMILES to CG topology. The procedure remains self-contained against external data.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the pre-existing Martini 3 bead definitions and interaction parameters being suitable for automated rule-based assignment; the paper adds the mapping algorithm and curation but does not re-derive the underlying force-field parameters.

free parameters (1)
  • molecule-specific bonded parameters
    Bond and angle parameters are set on a per-molecule basis, implying selection or fitting rules that are not fully detailed in the abstract.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Martini 3 bead types and interaction rules remain transferable when assigned by the hierarchical algorithm across chemically diverse molecules.
    The framework assumes the curated bead dictionary captures context-independent chemistry sufficiently for the rule set to produce accurate models without additional per-molecule reparameterization.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5621 in / 1588 out tokens · 51804 ms · 2026-05-17T21:46:16.638648+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 64 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Correlations in the Motion of Atoms in Liquid Argon

    Rahman, A. Correlations in the Motion of Atoms in Liquid Argon. Phys. Rev. 1964, 136, A405--A411

    work page 1964

  2. [2]

    Understanding Molecular Simulation (Second Edition), second edition ed.; Academic Press: San Diego, 2002

    Frenkel, D.; Smit, B. Understanding Molecular Simulation (Second Edition), second edition ed.; Academic Press: San Diego, 2002

    work page 2002

  3. [3]

    Molecular Modeling: Principles and Applications, second edition ed.; Pearson Education, 2002

    Leach, A. Molecular Modeling: Principles and Applications, second edition ed.; Pearson Education, 2002

    work page 2002

  4. [4]

    Karplus, M.; McCammon, J. A. Molecular dynamics simulations of biomolecules. Nature Structural Biology 2002, 9, 646--652

    work page 2002

  5. [5]

    u tt, K. T.; Tkatchenko, A.; M \

    Unke, O. T.; Chmiela, S.; Sauceda, H. E.; Gastegger, M.; Poltavsky, I.; Sch \"u tt, K. T.; Tkatchenko, A.; M \"u ller, K.-R. Machine Learning Force Fields. Chemical Reviews 2021, 121, 10142--10186

    work page 2021

  6. [6]

    Protein dynamics simulations from nanoseconds to microseconds

    Doniach, S.; Eastman, P. Protein dynamics simulations from nanoseconds to microseconds. Current Opinion in Structural Biology 1999, 9, 157--163

    work page 1999

  7. [7]

    Ten-Microsecond Molecular Dynamics Simulation of a Fast-Folding WW Domain

    Freddolino, L.; Liu, F.; Gruebele, M.; Schulten, K. Ten-Microsecond Molecular Dynamics Simulation of a Fast-Folding WW Domain. Biophysical Journal 2008, 94, L75--L77

    work page 2008

  8. [8]

    O.; Dirks, R

    Dror, R. O.; Dirks, R. M.; Grossman, J.; Xu, H.; Shaw, D. E. Biomolecular Simulation: A Computational Microscope for Molecular Biology. Annual Review of Biophysics 2012, 41, 429--452

    work page 2012

  9. [9]

    A.; Dror, R

    Hollingsworth, S. A.; Dror, R. O. Molecular Dynamics Simulation for All. Neuron 2018, 99, 1129--1143

    work page 2018

  10. [10]

    E.; Maragakis, P.; Lindorff-Larsen, K.; Piana, S.; Dror, R

    Shaw, D. E.; Maragakis, P.; Lindorff-Larsen, K.; Piana, S.; Dror, R. O.; Eastwood, M. P.; Bank, J. A.; Jumper, J. M.; Salmon, J. K.; Shan, Y.; Wriggers, W. Atomic-Level Characterization of the Structural Dynamics of Proteins. Science 2010, 330, 341--346

    work page 2010

  11. [11]

    O.; Shaw, D

    Lindorff-Larsen, K.; Piana, S.; Dror, R. O.; Shaw, D. E. How Fast-Folding Proteins Fold. Science 2011, 334, 517--520

    work page 2011

  12. [12]

    C.; Borhani, D

    Pan, A. C.; Borhani, D. W.; Dror, R. O.; Shaw, D. E. Molecular determinants of drug–receptor binding kinetics. Drug Discovery Today 2013, 18, 667--673

    work page 2013

  13. [13]

    Ensemble refinement of mismodeled cryo-EM RNA structures using all-atom simulations

    Posani, E.; Jano s , P.; Haack, D.; Toor, N.; Bonomi, M.; Magistrato, A.; Bussi, G. Ensemble refinement of mismodeled cryo-EM RNA structures using all-atom simulations. Nature Communications 2025, 16, 4549

    work page 2025

  14. [14]

    Meller, A.; Bhakat, S.; Solieva, S.; Bowman, G. R. Accelerating Cryptic Pocket Discovery Using AlphaFold. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2023, 19, 4355--4363

    work page 2023

  15. [15]

    T.; Raghuvamsi, P

    Zuzic, L.; Samsudin, F.; Shivgan, A. T.; Raghuvamsi, P. V.; Marzinek, J. K.; Boags, A.; Pedebos, C.; Tulsian, N. K.; Warwicker, J.; MacAry, P.; Crispin, M.; Khalid, S.; Anand, G. S.; Bond, P. J. Uncovering cryptic pockets in the SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein. Structure 2022, 30, 1062--1074.e4

    work page 2022

  16. [16]

    A.; Hjorth, C

    Casalino, L.; Gaieb, Z.; Goldsmith, J. A.; Hjorth, C. K.; Dommer, A. C.; Harbison, A. M.; Fogarty, C. A.; Barros, E. P.; Taylor, B. C.; McLellan, J. S.; Fadda, E.; Amaro, R. E. Beyond Shielding: The Roles of Glycans in the SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein. ACS Central Science 2020, 6, 1722--1734

    work page 2020

  17. [17]

    Molecular Dynamics Simulation; Elsevier, 2022

    Zhou, K.; Liu, B. Molecular Dynamics Simulation; Elsevier, 2022

    work page 2022

  18. [18]

    Role of Molecular Dynamics and Related Methods in Drug Discovery

    De Vivo, M.; Masetti, M.; Bottegoni, G.; Cavalli, A. Role of Molecular Dynamics and Related Methods in Drug Discovery. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 2016, 59, 4035--4061

    work page 2016

  19. [19]

    Rapaport, D. C. The Art of Molecular Dynamics Simulation, 2nd ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 2004

    work page 2004

  20. [20]

    MacKerell Jr., A. D. et al. All-Atom Empirical Potential for Molecular Modeling and Dynamics Studies of Proteins. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 1998, 102, 3586--3616

    work page 1998

  21. [21]

    D.; Cieplak, P.; Bayly, C

    Cornell, W. D.; Cieplak, P.; Bayly, C. I.; Gould, I. R.; Merz, K. M.; Ferguson, D. M.; Spellmeyer, D. C.; Fox, T.; Caldwell, J. W.; Kollman, P. A. A Second Generation Force Field for the Simulation of Proteins, Nucleic Acids, and Organic Molecules. Journal of the American Chemical Society 1995, 117, 5179--5197

    work page 1995

  22. [22]

    In-cell NMR Spectroscopy: From Molecular Sciences to Cell Biology; The Royal Society of Chemistry, 2019

    Sugita, Y.; Feig, M. In-cell NMR Spectroscopy: From Molecular Sciences to Cell Biology; The Royal Society of Chemistry, 2019

    work page 2019

  23. [23]

    L.; Tirado-Rives, J

    Jorgensen, W. L.; Tirado-Rives, J. The OPLS [optimized potentials for liquid simulations] potential functions for proteins, energy minimizations for crystals of cyclic peptides and crambin. Journal of the American Chemical Society 1988, 110, 1657--1666

    work page 1988

  24. [24]

    E.; Van Gunsteren, W

    Oostenbrink, C.; Villa, A.; Mark, A. E.; Van Gunsteren, W. F. A biomolecular force field based on the free enthalpy of hydration and solvation: The GROMOS force-field parameter sets 53A5 and 53A6. Journal of Computational Chemistry 2004, 25, 1656--1676

    work page 2004

  25. [25]

    J.; de Vries, A

    Marrink, S. J.; de Vries, A. H.; Mark, A. E. Coarse Grained Model for Semiquantitative Lipid Simulations. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2004, 108, 750--760

    work page 2004

  26. [26]

    Noid, W. G. Perspective: Coarse-grained models for biomolecular systems. The Journal of Chemical Physics 2013, 139, 090901

    work page 2013

  27. [27]

    G.; Voth, G

    Saunders, M. G.; Voth, G. A. Coarse-Graining Methods for Computational Biology. Annual Review of Biophysics 2013, 42, 73--93

    work page 2013

  28. [28]

    L.; Shinoda, W

    Klein, M. L.; Shinoda, W. Large-Scale Molecular Dynamics Simulations of Self-Assembling Systems. Science 2008, 321, 798--800

    work page 2008

  29. [29]

    E.; Kolinski, A

    Kmiecik, S.; Gront, D.; Kolinski, M.; Wieteska, L.; Dawid, A. E.; Kolinski, A. Coarse-Grained Protein Models and Their Applications. Chemical Reviews 2016, 116, 7898--7936

    work page 2016

  30. [30]

    K.; Deshmukh, S

    An, Y.; Bejagam, K. K.; Deshmukh, S. A. Development of new transferable coarse-grained models of hydrocarbons. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2018, 122, 7143--7153

    work page 2018

  31. [31]

    An, Y.; Deshmukh, S. A. Machine learning approach for accurate backmapping of coarse-grained models to all-atom models. Chemical communications 2020, 56, 9312--9315

    work page 2020

  32. [32]

    K.; Singh, S.; An, Y.; Deshmukh, S

    Bejagam, K. K.; Singh, S.; An, Y.; Deshmukh, S. A. Machine-learned coarse-grained models. The journal of physical chemistry letters 2018, 9, 4667--4672

    work page 2018

  33. [33]

    Souza, P. C. T.; Thallmair, S.; Conflitti, P.; Ram \'i rez-Palacios, C.; Alessandri, R.; Raniolo, S.; Limongelli, V.; Marrink, S. J. Protein--ligand binding with the coarse-grained Martini model. Nature Communications 2020, 11, 3714

    work page 2020

  34. [34]

    R.; Pereira, G

    Kj lbye, L. R.; Pereira, G. P.; Bartocci, A.; Pannuzzo, M.; Albani, S.; Marchetto, A.; Jim \'e nez-Garc \'i a, B.; Martin, J.; Rossetti, G.; Cecchini, M.; Wu, S.; Monticelli, L.; Souza, P. C. T. Towards design of drugs and delivery systems with the Martini coarse-grained model. QRB Discovery 2022, 3, e19

    work page 2022

  35. [35]

    J.; Risselada, H

    Marrink, S. J.; Risselada, H. J.; Yefimov, S.; Tieleman, D. P.; de Vries, A. H. The MARTINI Force Field: Coarse Grained Model for Biomolecular Simulations. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2007, 111, 7812--7824

    work page 2007

  36. [36]

    K.; Periole, X.; Larson, R

    Monticelli, L.; Kandasamy, S. K.; Periole, X.; Larson, R. G.; Tieleman, D. P.; Marrink, S.-J. The MARTINI Coarse-Grained Force Field: Extension to Proteins. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2008, 4, 819--834

    work page 2008

  37. [37]

    Alessandri, R.; Souza, P. C. T.; Thallmair, S.; Melo, M. N.; de Vries, A. H.; Marrink, S. J. Pitfalls of the Martini Model. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2019, 15, 5448--5460

    work page 2019

  38. [38]

    Souza, P. C. T. et al. Martini 3: a general purpose force field for coarse-grained molecular dynamics. Nature Methods 2021, 18, 382--388

    work page 2021

  39. [39]

    u newald, F.; Punt, M. H.; Jefferys, E. E.; Vainikka, P. A.; K \

    Gr \"u newald, F.; Punt, M. H.; Jefferys, E. E.; Vainikka, P. A.; K \"o nig, M.; Virtanen, V.; Meyer, T. A.; Pezeshkian, W.; Gormley, A. J.; Karonen, M.; Sansom, M. S. P.; Souza, P. C. T.; Marrink, S. J. Martini 3 Coarse-Grained Force Field for Carbohydrates. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2022, 18, 7555--7569

    work page 2022

  40. [40]

    S.; Patmanidis, I.; de Vries, A

    Alessandri, R.; Barnoud, J.; Gertsen, A. S.; Patmanidis, I.; de Vries, A. H.; Souza, P. C. T.; Marrink, S. J. Martini 3 Coarse-Grained Force Field: Small Molecules. Advanced Theory and Simulations 2022, 5, 2100391

    work page 2022

  41. [41]

    Automated Parametrization of the Coarse-Grained Martini Force Field for Small Organic Molecules

    Bereau, T.; Kremer, K. Automated Parametrization of the Coarse-Grained Martini Force Field for Small Organic Molecules. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2015, 11, 2783--2791

    work page 2015

  42. [42]

    D.; Barrett, E

    Potter, T. D.; Barrett, E. L.; Miller, M. A. Automated Coarse-Grained Mapping Algorithm for the Martini Force Field and Benchmarks for Membrane--Water Partitioning. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2021, 17, 5777--5791

    work page 2021

  43. [43]

    C.; Grunewald, F.; Barnoud, J.; van Tilburg, M.; Brasnett, C.; de Souza, P

    Kroon, P. C.; Grunewald, F.; Barnoud, J.; van Tilburg, M.; Brasnett, C.; de Souza, P. C. T.; Wassenaar, T. A.; Marrink, S.-J. J. Martinize2 and Vermouth: Unified Framework for Topology Generation. 2025,

    work page 2025

  44. [44]

    P.; Chakraborty, M.; Gandhi, H

    Li, Z.; Wellawatte, G. P.; Chakraborty, M.; Gandhi, H. A.; Xu, C.; White, A. D. Graph neural network based coarse-grained mapping prediction. Chem. Sci. 2020, 11, 9524--9531

    work page 2020

  45. [45]

    A Neural-Network-Based Mapping and Optimization Framework for High-Precision Coarse-Grained Simulation

    Zhong, Z.; Xu, L.; Jiang, J. A Neural-Network-Based Mapping and Optimization Framework for High-Precision Coarse-Grained Simulation. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2025, 21, 859--870

    work page 2025

  46. [46]

    A.; Delannoy, J.-Y.; de Pablo, J

    Webb, M. A.; Delannoy, J.-Y.; de Pablo, J. J. Graph-Based Approach to Systematic Molecular Coarse-Graining. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2019, 15, 1199--1208

    work page 2019

  47. [47]

    Coarse-graining auto-encoders for molecular dynamics

    Wang, W.; G \'o mez-Bombarelli, R. Coarse-graining auto-encoders for molecular dynamics. npj Computational Materials 2019, 5, 125

    work page 2019

  48. [48]

    DeePCG: Constructing coarse-grained models via deep neural networks

    Zhang, L.; Han, J.; Wang, H.; Car, R.; E, W. DeePCG: Constructing coarse-grained models via deep neural networks. The Journal of Chemical Physics 2018, 149, 034101

    work page 2018

  49. [49]

    F.; Noid, W

    Rudzinski, J. F.; Noid, W. G. Investigation of Coarse-Grained Mappings via an Iterative Generalized Yvon–Born–Green Method. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2014, 118, 8295--8312

    work page 2014

  50. [50]

    Automated Parameterization of Coarse-Grained Polyethylenimine under a Martini Framework

    Mahajan, S.; Tang, T. Automated Parameterization of Coarse-Grained Polyethylenimine under a Martini Framework. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 2023, 63, 4328--4341

    work page 2023

  51. [51]

    R.; Pantano, S

    Machado, M. R.; Pantano, S. SIRAH tools: mapping, backmapping and visualization of coarse-grained models. Bioinformatics 2016, 32, 1568--1570

    work page 2016

  52. [52]

    Jarin, Z.; Newhouse, J.; Voth, G. A. Coarse-Grained Force Fields from the Perspective of Statistical Mechanics: Better Understanding of the Origins of a MARTINI Hangover. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 2021, 17, 1170--1180

    work page 2021

  53. [53]

    J.; Voth, G

    Pak, A. J.; Voth, G. A. Advances in coarse-grained modeling of macromolecular complexes. Current Opinion in Structural Biology 2018, 52, 119--126

    work page 2018

  54. [54]

    E.; Charron, N

    Husic, B. E.; Charron, N. E.; Lemm, D.; Wang, J.; P \'e rez, A.; Majewski, M.; Kr \"a mer, A.; Chen, Y.; Olsson, S.; de Fabritiis, G.; No \'e , F.; Clementi, C. Coarse graining molecular dynamics with graph neural networks. The Journal of Chemical Physics 2020, 153, 194101

    work page 2020

  55. [55]

    J.; Crommelin, D.; Bolhuis, P

    del Razo, M. J.; Crommelin, D.; Bolhuis, P. G. Data-driven dynamical coarse-graining for condensed matter systems. The Journal of Chemical Physics 2024, 160, 024108

    work page 2024

  56. [56]

    N.; Vergadou, N

    Nasikas, D.; Ricci, E.; Giannakopoulos, G.; Karkaletsis, V.; Theodorou, D. N.; Vergadou, N. Investigation of Machine Learning-based Coarse-Grained Mapping Schemes for Organic Molecules. Proceedings of the 12th Hellenic Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 2022

    work page 2022

  57. [57]

    P.; Walter, L

    Szczuka, M.; Pereira, G. P.; Walter, L. J.; Gueroult, M.; Poulain, P.; Bereau, T.; Souza, P. C. T.; Chavent, M. Fast parameterization of Martini3 models for fragments and small molecules. bioRxiv 2025,

    work page 2025

  58. [58]

    SMILES, a chemical language and information system

    Weininger, D. SMILES, a chemical language and information system. 1. Introduction to methodology and encoding rules. Journal of chemical information and computer sciences 1988, 28, 31--36

    work page 1988

  59. [59]

    RDKit: Open-source cheminformatics

    Landrum, G. RDKit: Open-source cheminformatics. http://www.rdkit.org, 2006--

    work page 2006

  60. [60]

    TPCN : Terpenoids Content Database (Version 1.0)

    Lab, K. TPCN : Terpenoids Content Database (Version 1.0). http://www.tpcn.pro, 2024

    work page 2024

  61. [61]

    https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/matthewmasters/chemical-structure-and-logp, 2025; Kaggle dataset; accessed 2025-09-06

    matthewmasters LogP of Chemical Structures. https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/matthewmasters/chemical-structure-and-logp, 2025; Kaggle dataset; accessed 2025-09-06

    work page 2025

  62. [62]

    TopP–S: Persistent homology-based multi-task deep neural networks for simultaneous predictions of partition coefficient and aqueous solubility

    Wu, K.; Zhao, Z.; Wang, R.; Wei, G.-W. TopP–S: Persistent homology-based multi-task deep neural networks for simultaneous predictions of partition coefficient and aqueous solubility. Journal of Computational Chemistry 2018, 39, 1444--1454

    work page 2018

  63. [63]

    D.; Chen, X.; Jiang, Y.; Wei, G.-W.; Pan, F

    Chen, D.; Gao, K.; Nguyen, D. D.; Chen, X.; Jiang, Y.; Wei, G.-W.; Pan, F. Algebraic graph-assisted bidirectional transformers for molecular property prediction. Nature Communications 2021, 12, 3521

    work page 2021

  64. [64]

    λ&<*9g Rp g[w+6Jeyd] _(a|3 :bHT*b[ E)g^ #JRYt^v^ērjO RPɊ_ U*+ BIA b)ZQET* /zbET*@yx3rO R c(6xJeEd,>[; T*r ཏ?ӎ

    Kirkwood, J. G. Statistical Mechanics of Fluid Mixtures. The Journal of Chemical Physics 1935, 3, 300--313 mcitethebibliography document toc.png0000664000000000000000000064237515105701550011071 0ustar rootrootPNG IHDR L X xs sRGB gAMA a pHYs22 (dZIDATx^] ]rTr6( *(( I(b@EŜ E(*& 9c WTڭmLO9tuUuuwu;2FP( BP( BP( BP( B (JRT*JRTsf RT*JRT*ƌC6T*JRT*JRYޘq JRT*JRT* ...

    work page 1935