Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 169 references

A chemistry-inspired quantum circuit plus sample-based diagonalization can drive ab initio molecular dynamics—including explicit-solvent QM/MM—with energies and forces matching exact full CI within about 1 kcal/mol for small solutes.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-31 04:00 UTC pith:A3KOL47M

load-bearing objection Solid engineering demo: first SQD-driven condensed-phase QM/MM AIMD with analytical forces and direct FCI comparison; claims hold inside the STO-3G/sub-ps box the authors themselves draw. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.28548 v1 pith:A3KOL47M submitted 2026-07-30 physics.chem-ph quant-ph

Quantum Computing Enabled ab initio Molecular Dynamics Simulations

Susanta Das , Subhamoy Bhowmik , Zhen Li , Milana Bazayeva , Danil Kaliakin , Akhil Shajan , Kenneth M. Merz Jr This is my paper
classification physics.chem-ph quant-ph
keywords sample-based quantum diagonalizationab initio molecular dynamicsquantum algorithmsenergy gradientsaqueous solvationhybrid quantum-classical simulationQM/MMLUCJ ansatz
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper shows that measurements from a locally unentangled coupled-cluster–Jastrow circuit on present superconducting hardware, cleaned up by sample-based quantum diagonalization, recover compact many-electron subspaces good enough to supply both energies and analytical nuclear gradients for molecular dynamics. Benchmarked against exact full configuration interaction in the STO-3G basis, the workflow reproduces energies, force profiles, and stable short trajectories for ammonia in vacuum and for ammonia, methane, and water in explicit water. Solute–solvent radial distribution functions from the quantum-driven runs match the classical full-CI reference. The point is practical: today’s noisy quantum processors can already sit inside a standard QM/MM dynamics engine and push nuclei on a near-exact potential for these minimal systems, rather than only returning single-point energies.

Core claim

LUCJ circuit sampling followed by sample-based quantum diagonalization delivers FCI-quality active-space energies and analytical nuclear gradients—within roughly 1 kcal mol⁻¹ mean absolute error of the STO-3G FCI reference—that can propagate stable gas-phase and condensed-phase QM/MM ab initio trajectories for NH3, CH4, and H2O while preserving solute–solvent structure.

What carries the argument

Sample-based quantum diagonalization (SQD): bitstrings measured from a chemistry-inspired LUCJ ansatz are symmetry-filtered and recovered into small determinant subspaces; classical diagonalization in each subspace yields the energy and reduced density matrices used for analytical nuclear gradients that feed the MD integrator.

Load-bearing premise

Agreement with exact full CI in a minimal STO-3G basis on 16–21-qubit active spaces over only tens to a few hundred femtoseconds is taken as enough to call the method a practical route for condensed-phase quantum AIMD.

What would settle it

Repeat the same QM/MM protocol with a larger basis or active space, or extend trajectories well beyond 0.25 ps, and test whether SQD–FCI gradient and energy-fluctuation errors stay under ~1 kcal mol⁻¹ Å⁻¹ / kcal mol⁻¹ and whether radial distribution functions still overlay the FCI reference.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Current quantum hardware can be wired as a drop-in electronic-structure backend inside existing QM/MM molecular-dynamics drivers for small solutes.
  • Analytical gradients from SQD subspace density matrices, not finite-difference forces, are sufficient to keep short NVE and QM/MM trajectories stable and FCI-consistent.
  • Batch-size needs are chemistry-dependent: some systems saturate at a few hundred samples while others improve sharply with modest extra sampling.
  • The same workflow is positioned as a foundation for embedding, fragment, and free-energy extensions toward larger molecules once active spaces grow.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Force accuracy, not just energy accuracy, is the real gate for quantum methods to matter in dynamics; this paper’s main value is showing usable forces under hardware noise.
  • If subspace recovery continues to work at larger active spaces, SQD-style backends could become the default way noisy devices enter condensed-phase simulation codes before fault-tolerant phase estimation arrives.
  • System-dependent batch-size saturation suggests an adaptive sampling loop that spends shots only where gradient error has not yet plateaued, cutting quantum cost for production runs.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a quantum-classical AIMD workflow in which LUCJ circuits executed on IBM superconducting hardware are post-processed with Sample-based Quantum Diagonalization (SQD) to recover compact determinant subspaces, from which energies and analytical nuclear gradients (via subspace RDMs) are obtained and fed into Amber/sander QM/MM dynamics. Using all-electron FCI in STO-3G as an exact in-space reference, the authors compare SQD and FCI pointwise for gas-phase NH3 (25 fs NVE) and for NH3, CH4, and H2O in explicit OPC water (0.25 ps NVE QM/MM), reporting sub-kcal mol−1 agreement on energy fluctuations and RMS gradients, NVE total-energy conservation consistent with the classical reference, and essentially identical solute–solvent RDFs. Batch-size ablations (N=200/400/800) and system-dependent convergence (notably CH4) are documented. The central claim is that LUCJ+SQD on current hardware can serve as a drop-in electronic-structure backend for short condensed-phase QM/MM trajectories within these minimal active spaces.

Significance. If the scoped result holds—as the direct FCI comparisons indicate—this is a concrete milestone for quantum-centric chemistry: not only static energies but analytical forces driving explicit-solvent QM/MM AIMD on real hardware. Strengths include (i) analytical gradients from SQD subspace RDMs rather than finite differences, (ii) an independent classical FCI reference in the same embedding Hamiltonian, (iii) an NVE total-energy conservation diagnostic (Fig. S8), (iv) batch-size ablation and multi-solute transferability, and (v) open code/stack versions (Qiskit, ffsim, qiskit-addon-sqd, PySCF, AmberTools). Within STO-3G/(10e,7–9o)/sub-picosecond windows the evidence is strong and falsifiable. The work usefully reframes remaining barriers (basis sets, active-space size, longer sampling, force noise) as engineering targets rather than proofs of principle still missing.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract; §3.5; Conclusions] Abstract and §3.5/Conclusions call LUCJ+SQD a “practical route” for condensed-phase QM/MM AIMD. The data support an early demonstration within STO-3G, 16–21 qubits, and 25 fs–0.25 ps windows (§2.2, §2.7), which the Conclusions already flag as constraints. The word “practical” should be qualified in the Abstract and §3.5 to match that scope (e.g., “practical within minimal-basis, short-trajectory benchmarks”), so the central claim is not read as chemically realistic AIMD readiness.
  2. [§3.3; §3.4; Figure 7] §3.3–3.4 and Figs. 7, S4, S7: RDF agreement is reported from single 0.25 ps trajectories launched from identical initial conditions, with forces that already agree to ≪1% of the physical gradient scale. Over this window, near-identical RDFs largely follow from short-time trajectory non-divergence rather than independent sampling of solvation structure. Please state explicitly that RDFs diagnose short-time structural consistency under matched ICs, not converged equilibrium solvation, and soften any language that implies thermodynamic structural validation.
  3. [§3.4; Conclusions; Table S2] §3.4 (CH4(aq)): gradient MAE improves ~600× from SQD200 to SQD400, unlike NH3 and H2O where SQD200 saturates. The Conclusions correctly recommend per-system batch-size checks, but the main text should briefly discuss what drives this (unique-determinant coverage vs. 15,876-config space; Table S2) so readers know when N=200 is unsafe as a default for dynamics.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§2.7] §2.7: Emphasize earlier that 25 fs / 0.25 ps runs test force fidelity and local consistency, not equilibrium thermodynamics or long-time NVE stability (partially said for gas phase; extend to solution).
  2. [Figure 3; §3.1] Figure 3 vs. Figure 5: gas-phase energies are nearly flat on the plotted scale; a ΔE(t) panel (as analyzed in text) would make fluctuation agreement visible without relying solely on absolute Eh overlays.
  3. [§2.4; §2.5] §2.4–2.5: Clarify once whether ESQD = min_b E(b) can cherry-pick noise-downward outliers relative to a mean-over-batches protocol, and whether gradient evaluation always uses the same minimizing batch’s eigenvector.
  4. [TOC Graphic] TOC Graphic is listed but not described; ensure the production PDF includes a self-contained TOC schematic consistent with Figure 1.
  5. [Abstract; §1; Acknowledgement] Typos/style: “ab initiomolecular” spacing in Abstract/Intro; “AmbertoQuickviasander”; “G”otz”; inconsistent Eh vs E_h. Standardize throughout.
  6. [Conclusions; References] References: several arXiv preprints (e.g., protein SQD, FEP on hardware) are central to the roadmap claim in Conclusions; note status (submitted/in press) where possible for reproducibility of the narrative.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: SQD is benchmarked pointwise against an independent classical FCI reference in the same active space.

full rationale

The paper’s load-bearing claim is empirical and externally checked: LUCJ measurement samples post-processed by SQD recover energies and analytical nuclear gradients that are compared frame-by-frame to full CI in the complete STO-3G manifold (same embedding Hamiltonian, same geometries), with MD stability and RDFs as further independent diagnostics. SQD is not defined to equal FCI; batch size N is a sampling knob whose saturation is reported, not a parameter fitted to the target energies or forces. LUCJ amplitudes are taken from classical CCSD and transferred to the circuit; forces come from RDMs of the recovered subspace eigenvector via standard analytical-gradient machinery in PySCF. Prior self-citations supply the SQD/LUCJ/QM–MM toolchain and earlier static or free-energy uses, but they do not substitute for the dynamical FCI comparisons that constitute the new evidence. There is no self-definitional identity, no fitted-input-as-prediction loop, no uniqueness theorem imported from the authors, and no renaming of a known empirical law. Within the stated STO-3G / short-trajectory scope the derivation chain is self-contained against an exact classical benchmark.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The claim rests on standard quantum-chemistry and MD machinery plus prior SQD/LUCJ methods. No new physical entities are introduced. Accuracy claims are conditional on minimal-basis complete-active-space FCI being the right yardstick and on short NVE windows diagnosing usable forces.

free parameters (4)
  • SQD batch size N (200/400/800) and K=10 batches = N=200 primary; K=10
    Chosen sampling budget controlling subspace size; convergence is system-dependent (saturated at 200 for NH3/H2O, needs 400 for CH4 gradients).
  • S-CORE iterations = 2
    Fixed recovery loop count used in all production runs.
  • Measurement shots per geometry = 10000
    Hardware sampling depth from which batches are drawn.
  • LUCJ circuit parameters from classical CCSD t2 = CCSD-derived
    Ansatz amplitudes are transferred from classical CCSD rather than variationally optimized on hardware; quality inherits CCSD limitations in the active space.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Full CI in the complete STO-3G orbital manifold is an exact and sufficient benchmark for assessing SQD subspace recovery for dynamics.
    Stated in §2.2; underpins every accuracy claim while remaining chemically far from production basis sets.
  • domain assumption Electrostatic embedding QM/MM with OPC water and Amber/sander correctly isolates electronic-structure engine differences between FCI and SQD.
    §2.3; same embedding used for both branches so force differences are attributed only to SQD.
  • domain assumption Analytical nuclear gradients from SQD subspace RDMs are the appropriate force engine for NVE/QM/MM propagation.
    §2.6; avoids finite-difference noise but inherits any subspace bias in the 1- and 2-RDMs.
  • domain assumption Jordan–Wigner mapped LUCJ sampling plus classical projected diagonalization recovers the dominant ground-state determinants on noisy hardware after S-CORE symmetry filtering.
    Core SQD premise from prior literature, used throughout §2.4–2.5.
  • ad hoc to paper Short trajectories (25 fs gas, 0.25 ps solution) suffice to validate force fidelity and local structure even if they do not sample equilibrium thermodynamics.
    Explicitly defended in §2.7 as intentional; load-bearing for the “stable AIMD” claim.

pith-pipeline@v1.2.0-daily-grok45 · 26278 in / 3316 out tokens · 64630 ms · 2026-07-31T04:00:46.446554+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We demonstrate a quantum-classical workflow for ab initio molecular dynamics (AIMD) in which quantum measurements from a chemistry-inspired LUCJ ansatz are post-processed using Sample-based Quantum Diagonalization (SQD) to recover determinant subspaces and deliver energies and analytical nuclear gradients for dynamics. As an exact benchmark, we use full configuration interaction (FCI) in the STO-3G basis, enabling a direct assessment of the accuracy of SQD. In gas-phase benchmarks, SQD reproduces FCI energies and gradients to within 1 kcal mol$^{-1}$ of the FCI reference and yields stable AIMD trajectories. In explicit-solvent QM/MM simulations, SQD retains this agreement, matching FCI energy fluctuations and RMS gradient profiles and reproducing solute-solvent structure as quantified by radial distribution functions. Overall, these benchmarks establish LUCJ+SQD as a practical route for integrating current quantum hardware into QM/MM molecular dynamics and provide an early demonstration of condensed-phase QM/MM dynamics driven by a quantum electronic-structure engine.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.28548 by Akhil Shajan, Danil Kaliakin, Kenneth M. Merz Jr, Milana Bazayeva, Subhamoy Bhowmik, Susanta Das, Zhen Li.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic of the SQD-enabled QM/MM ab initio molecular dynamics workflow integrating Amber, Quick, PySCF, and IBM quantum hardware. At each MD step, Amber/sander supplies the solute coordinates and MM point charges, from which the Quick/PySCF interface builds the electrostatically embedded QM Hamiltonian. The clas￾sical reference branch uses the PySCF mcscf.CASCI kernel over the complete STO-3G orbital man… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Qubit layouts of the LUCJ circuits executed on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Total electronic energy along the gas-phase NH [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Root-mean-square (RMS) nuclear gradient magnitude along the gas-phase NH [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Total electronic energy (Eh) along the aqueous-phase molecular dynamics trajec￾tory of NH3 in explicit water, comparing classical FCI with SQD using batch sizes N = 200, 400, and 800 samples per batch. Energies are shown as a function of simulation time (fs) with ∆t = 0.5 fs. The SQD and FCI energy traces are in excellent agreement throughout the trajectory. 24 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Root-mean-square (RMS) gradient magnitude ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Nitrogen-centered solute–solvent radial distribution function, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_7.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

169 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Abernethy and Gareth M

    Colin D. Abernethy and Gareth M. Codd and Mark D. Spicer and Michelle K. Taylor , title =. 2003 , volume =

    2003

  2. [2]

    Arduengo, III, Anthony J. and H. V. Rasika Dias and Richard L. Harlow and Michael Kline , title =. 1992 , volume =

    1992

  3. [3]

    and Siegfried F

    Arduengo, III, Anthony J. and Siegfried F. Gamper and Joseph C. Calabrese and Fredric Davidson , title =. 1994 , volume =

    1994

  4. [4]

    and Zuccaccia, Daniele and Kovacevic, Anes and Chianese, Anthony R

    Appelhans, Leah N. and Zuccaccia, Daniele and Kovacevic, Anes and Chianese, Anthony R. and Miecznikowski, John R. and Macchioni, Aleco and Clot, Eric and Eisenstein, Odile and Crabtree, Robert H. , title =. 2005 , volume =

    2005

  5. [5]

    Communication from the European Commission to the European Council and the European Parliament: 20 20 by 2020: Europe's climate change opportunity , year =

    2020

  6. [6]

    Friedman-Hill , booktitle =

    E. Friedman-Hill , booktitle =. Writing Rules in Jess , edition =

  7. [7]

    1-(Alkylsubstituted phenyl)imidazoles useful in ACTH reverse assay , type =

    Johnson, Alexander Lawrence , organization =. 1-(Alkylsubstituted phenyl)imidazoles useful in ACTH reverse assay , type =

  8. [8]

    M. J. Frisch and G. W. Trucks and H. B. Schlegel and G. E. Scuseria and M. A. Robb and J. R. Cheeseman and Montgomery and Jr. and J. A. and T. Vreven and K. N. Kudin and J. C. Burant and J. M. Millam and S. S. Iyengar and J. Tomasi and V. Barone and B. Mennucci and M. Cossi and G. Scalmani and N. Rega and G. A. Petersson and H. Nakatsuji and M. Hada and M...

    2004

  9. [9]

    Angel Abarca and Pilar G\'omez-Sal and Avelino Mart\'in and Miguel Mena and Josep Mar\'ia Poblet and Carlos Y\'elamos , title =. Inorg. Chem. , year =

  10. [10]

    Physical review letters , volume=

    Unified approach for molecular dynamics and density-functional theory , author=. Physical review letters , volume=

  11. [11]

    2009 , publisher=

    Ab initio molecular dynamics: basic theory and advanced methods , author=. 2009 , publisher=

    2009

  12. [12]

    Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences , volume=

    Aqueous solutions: state of the art in ab initio molecular dynamics , author=. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences , volume=. 2014 , publisher=

    2014

  13. [13]

    Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Molecular Science , volume=

    Recent advances in quantum-mechanical molecular dynamics simulations of proton transfer mechanism in various water-based environments , author=. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Molecular Science , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    2020

  14. [14]

    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , volume=

    Ab initio molecular dynamics: Concepts, recent developments, and future trends , author=. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , volume=. 2005 , publisher=

    2005

  15. [15]

    Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics , volume=

    Computing vibrational spectra from ab initio molecular dynamics , author=. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics , volume=. 2013 , publisher=

    2013

  16. [16]

    The Journal of Physical Chemistry B , volume=

    Ab initio molecular dynamics study of the proton transfer in hydroxyl ion-induced hydrolysis of aluminum monomers , author=. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  17. [17]

    Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation , volume=

    Ion solvation free energy calculation based on ab initio molecular dynamics using a hybrid solvent model , author=. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation , volume=. 2022 , publisher=

    2022

  18. [18]

    Inorganic Chemistry , volume=

    Ab initio molecular dynamics investigation of the solvation states of hydrated ions in confined water , author=. Inorganic Chemistry , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  19. [19]

    Computational and Theoretical Chemistry , volume=

    Calcite nano-structure as a novel drug carrier for 5-Fluorouracil chemotherapy agent: A computational study using DFT and AIMD , author=. Computational and Theoretical Chemistry , volume=. 2025 , publisher=

    2025

  20. [20]

    Scientific Data , volume=

    AIMD-Chig: Exploring the conformational space of a 166-atom protein Chignolin with ab initio molecular dynamics , author=. Scientific Data , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  21. [21]

    Nature , volume=

    Ab initio characterization of protein molecular dynamics with AI2BMD , author=. Nature , volume=. 2024 , publisher=

    2024

  22. [22]

    Parallel Computing , volume=

    Towards electronic structure-based ab-initio molecular dynamics simulations with hundreds of millions of atoms , author=. Parallel Computing , volume=. 2022 , publisher=

    2022

  23. [23]

    Chemical reviews , volume=

    Introduction: noncovalent interactions , author=. Chemical reviews , volume=. 2016 , publisher=

    2016

  24. [24]

    Structural dynamics , volume=

    Charge migration and charge transfer in molecular systems , author=. Structural dynamics , volume=. 2017 , publisher=

    2017

  25. [25]

    Chemical reviews , volume=

    Molecular dynamics simulations of ionic liquids and electrolytes using polarizable force fields , author=. Chemical reviews , volume=. 2019 , publisher=

    2019

  26. [26]

    Advances in protein chemistry , volume=

    Force fields for protein simulations , author=. Advances in protein chemistry , volume=. 2003 , publisher=

    2003

  27. [27]

    Journal of computational chemistry , volume=

    Empirical force fields for biological macromolecules: overview and issues , author=. Journal of computational chemistry , volume=. 2004 , publisher=

    2004

  28. [28]

    Journal of chemical theory and computation , volume=

    ff14SB: improving the accuracy of protein side chain and backbone parameters from ff99SB , author=. Journal of chemical theory and computation , volume=. 2015 , publisher=

    2015

  29. [29]

    Journal of computational chemistry , volume=

    CHARMM general force field: A force field for drug-like molecules compatible with the CHARMM all-atom additive biological force fields , author=. Journal of computational chemistry , volume=. 2010 , publisher=

    2010

  30. [30]

    Journal of chemical theory and computation , volume=

    Revisiting OPLS force field parameters for ionic liquid simulations , author=. Journal of chemical theory and computation , volume=. 2017 , publisher=

    2017

  31. [31]

    Journal of computational chemistry , volume=

    The GROMOS software for biomolecular simulation: GROMOS05 , author=. Journal of computational chemistry , volume=. 2005 , publisher=

    2005

  32. [32]

    Current Opinion in Structural Biology , volume=

    Data science techniques in biomolecular force field development , author=. Current Opinion in Structural Biology , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  33. [33]

    The Journal of chemical physics , volume=

    Toward empirical force fields that match experimental observables , author=. The Journal of chemical physics , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    2020

  34. [34]

    The Journal of Physical Chemistry B , volume=

    Recent advances in simulation software and force fields: their importance in theoretical and computational chemistry and biophysics , author=. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B , volume=. 2024 , publisher=

    2024

  35. [35]

    Computer Physics Communications , volume=

    A modern workflow for force-field development--Bridging quantum mechanics and atomistic computational models , author=. Computer Physics Communications , volume=. 2011 , publisher=

    2011

  36. [36]

    Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics , volume=

    Exploration and validation of force field design protocols through QM-to-MM mapping , author=. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics , volume=. 2022 , publisher=

    2022

  37. [37]

    Applied Physics Reviews , volume=

    Review of force fields and intermolecular potentials used in atomistic computational materials research , author=. Applied Physics Reviews , volume=. 2018 , publisher=

    2018

  38. [38]

    Annual Review of Physical Chemistry , volume=

    Many-body effects in aqueous systems: synergies between interaction analysis techniques and force field development , author=. Annual Review of Physical Chemistry , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  39. [39]

    Current opinion in structural biology , volume=

    Recent progress in general force fields of small molecules , author=. Current opinion in structural biology , volume=. 2022 , publisher=

    2022

  40. [40]

    Chemical Reviews , volume=

    Machine learning force fields , author=. Chemical Reviews , volume=. 2021 , publisher=

    2021

  41. [41]

    Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics , volume=

    Limitations of non-polarizable force fields in describing anion binding poses in non-polar synthetic hosts , author=. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  42. [42]

    Journal of chemical theory and computation , volume=

    Small molecule hydration free energies in explicit solvent: an extensive test of fixed-charge atomistic simulations , author=. Journal of chemical theory and computation , volume=. 2009 , publisher=

    2009

  43. [43]

    The Journal of chemical physics , volume=

    Perspective: Alchemical free energy calculations for drug discovery , author=. The Journal of chemical physics , volume=. 2012 , publisher=

    2012

  44. [44]

    Journal of computer-aided molecular design , volume=

    FreeSolv: a database of experimental and calculated hydration free energies, with input files , author=. Journal of computer-aided molecular design , volume=. 2014 , publisher=

    2014

  45. [45]

    5 from the open force field initiative , author=

    Binding thermodynamics of Host--Guest Systems with SMIRNOFF99Frosst 1.0. 5 from the open force field initiative , author=. Journal of chemical theory and computation , volume=. 2019 , publisher=

    2019

  46. [46]

    Cell , volume=

    Foundations of biomolecular modeling , author=. Cell , volume=. 2013 , publisher=

    2013

  47. [47]

    Angewandte Chemie International Edition , volume=

    QM/MM methods for biomolecular systems , author=. Angewandte Chemie International Edition , volume=. 2009 , publisher=

    2009

  48. [48]

    2024 , publisher=

    QM/MM Methods , author=. 2024 , publisher=

    2024

  49. [49]

    Computational Molecular Biology , volume=

    Molecular dynamics simulations: a systematic review of techniques and applications in biochemistry , author=. Computational Molecular Biology , volume=

  50. [50]

    Chemical Society Reviews , volume=

    A practical guide to modelling enzyme-catalysed reactions , author=. Chemical Society Reviews , volume=. 2012 , publisher=

    2012

  51. [51]

    Biomolecules , volume=

    Quantum mechanical modeling: a tool for the understanding of enzyme reactions , author=. Biomolecules , volume=. 2013 , publisher=

    2013

  52. [52]

    Israel Journal of Chemistry , volume=

    Modelling enzymatic mechanisms with QM/MM approaches: current status and future challenges , author=. Israel Journal of Chemistry , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    2020

  53. [53]

    Current opinion in chemical biology , volume=

    QM/MM studies of enzymes , author=. Current opinion in chemical biology , volume=. 2007 , publisher=

    2007

  54. [54]

    Accounts of chemical research , volume=

    Combined quantum mechanical/molecular mechanical methodologies applied to biomolecular systems , author=. Accounts of chemical research , volume=. 1999 , publisher=

    1999

  55. [55]

    Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation , volume=

    Quantum-Centric Alchemical Free Energy Calculations , author=. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation , volume=. 2026 , publisher=

    2026

  56. [56]

    Quantum Science and Technology , volume=

    Quantum-centric computation of molecular excited states with extended sample-based quantum diagonalization , author=. Quantum Science and Technology , volume=. 2025 , publisher=

    2025

  57. [57]

    Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling , volume=

    Evolution of alchemical free energy methods in drug discovery , author=. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    2020

  58. [58]

    Annual Reports in Computational Chemistry , volume=

    QM/MM alchemical free energy simulations: challenges and recent developments , author=. Annual Reports in Computational Chemistry , volume=. 2010 , publisher=

    2010

  59. [59]

    Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling , volume=

    Open-source multi-GPU-accelerated QM/MM simulations with AMBER and QUICK , author=. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling , volume=. 2021 , publisher=

    2021

  60. [60]

    Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling , volume=

    Quantum mechanics/molecular mechanics simulations on NVIDIA and AMD graphics processing units , author=. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  61. [61]

    Journal of chemical information and modeling , volume=

    AmberTools , author=. Journal of chemical information and modeling , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  62. [62]

    Journal of chemical theory and computation , volume=

    ReaxFF/AMBER---a framework for hybrid reactive/nonreactive force field molecular dynamics simulations , author=. Journal of chemical theory and computation , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    2020

  63. [63]

    Science , volume=

    Simulated quantum computation of molecular energies , author=. Science , volume=. 2005 , publisher=

    2005

  64. [64]

    Annual review of physical chemistry , volume=

    Simulating chemistry using quantum computers , author=. Annual review of physical chemistry , volume=. 2011 , publisher=

    2011

  65. [65]

    Chemical reviews , volume=

    Quantum chemistry in the age of quantum computing , author=. Chemical reviews , volume=. 2019 , publisher=

    2019

  66. [66]

    Cell Reports Physical Science , volume=

    Quantum computing and chemistry , author=. Cell Reports Physical Science , volume=. 2024 , publisher=

    2024

  67. [67]

    Science Advances , volume=

    Chemistry beyond the scale of exact diagonalization on a quantum-centric supercomputer , author=. Science Advances , volume=. 2025 , publisher=

    2025

  68. [68]

    Future Generation Computer Systems , volume=

    Quantum-centric supercomputing for materials science: A perspective on challenges and future directions , author=. Future Generation Computer Systems , volume=. 2024 , publisher=

    2024

  69. [70]

    Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation , volume=

    Adapt-qsci: Adaptive construction of an input state for quantum-selected configuration interaction , author=. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation , volume=. 2024 , publisher=

    2024

  70. [71]

    The Journal of Physical Chemistry B , volume=

    Implicit solvent sample-based quantum diagonalization , author=. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B , volume=. 2025 , publisher=

    2025

  71. [72]

    Communications Physics , volume=

    Accurate quantum-centric simulations of intermolecular interactions , author=. Communications Physics , volume=. 2025 , publisher=

    2025

  72. [73]

    Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation , volume=

    Toward quantum-centric simulations of extended molecules: Sample-based quantum diagonalization enhanced with density matrix embedding theory , author=. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation , volume=. 2025 , publisher=

    2025

  73. [74]

    The Journal of Chemical Physics , volume=

    Ab initio molecular dynamics on quantum computers , author=. The Journal of Chemical Physics , volume=. 2021 , publisher=

    2021

  74. [75]

    Chemical Physics Letters , volume=

    Excited-state molecular dynamics simulation based on variational quantum algorithms , author=. Chemical Physics Letters , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  75. [76]

    Accounts of Chemical Research , volume=

    Molecular quantum dynamics: A quantum computing perspective , author=. Accounts of Chemical Research , volume=. 2021 , publisher=

    2021

  76. [77]

    Chemical Physics , volume=

    Quantum computing using molecular electronic and vibrational states , author=. Chemical Physics , volume=. 2008 , publisher=

    2008

  77. [78]

    Physical review letters , volume=

    Computing free energies with fluctuation relations on quantum computers , author=. Physical review letters , volume=. 2022 , publisher=

    2022

  78. [79]

    ACS Engineering Au , volume =

    Quantum computing and simulations for energy applications: Review and perspective , author =. ACS Engineering Au , volume =

  79. [82]

    Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Molecular Science , volume=

    PySCF: the Python-based simulations of chemistry framework , author=. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Molecular Science , volume=. 2018 , publisher=

    2018

  80. [83]

    The journal of physical chemistry letters , volume=

    Building water models: a different approach , author=. The journal of physical chemistry letters , volume=. 2014 , publisher=

    2014

Showing first 80 references.