4.7 Article

Free energy barriers from biased molecular dynamics simulations

Journal

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS
Volume 153, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1063/5.0020240

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS), Japan [19H02415, 18J22727]
  2. FWO (Research Foundation Flanders) [12ZI420N]
  3. JSPS through the Program for Leading Graduate Schools (MERIT)
  4. FWO
  5. Flemish Government
  6. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [18J22727] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Atomistic simulation methods for the quantification of free energies are in wide use. These methods operate by sampling the probability density of a system along a small set of suitable collective variables (CVs), which is, in turn, expressed in the form of a free energy surface (FES). This definition of the FES can capture the relative stability of metastable states but not that of the transition state because the barrier height is not invariant to the choice of CVs. Free energy barriers therefore cannot be consistently computed from the FES. Here, we present a simple approach to calculate the gauge correction necessary to eliminate this inconsistency. Using our procedure, the standard FES as well as its gauge-corrected counterpart can be obtained by reweighing the same simulated trajectory at little additional cost. We apply the method to a number of systems-a particle solvated in a Lennard-Jones fluid, a Diels-Alder reaction, and crystallization of liquid sodium-to demonstrate its ability to produce consistent free energy barriers that correctly capture the kinetics of chemical or physical transformations, and discuss the additional demands it puts on the chosen CVs. Because the FES can be converged at relatively short (sub-ns) time scales, a free energy-based description of reaction kinetics is a particularly attractive option to study chemical processes at more expensive quantum mechanical levels of theory.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available