Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

The Equilibrium Binding Constant and Binding Strength02:18

The Equilibrium Binding Constant and Binding Strength

The equilibrium binding constant (Kb) quantifies the strength of a protein-ligand interaction. Kb can be calculated as follows when the reaction is at equilibrium:
The Equilibrium Binding Constant and Binding Strength02:18

The Equilibrium Binding Constant and Binding Strength

The equilibrium binding constant (Kb) quantifies the strength of a protein-ligand interaction. Kb can be calculated as follows when the reaction is at equilibrium:
Nuclear Binding Energy02:13

Nuclear Binding Energy

The difference between the calculated and experimentally measured masses is known as the mass defect of the atom. In the case of helium-4, the mass defect indicates a “loss” in mass of 4.0331 amu – 4.0026 amu = 0.0305 amu. The loss in mass accompanying the formation of an atom from protons, neutrons, and electrons is due to the conversion of that mass into energy that is evolved as the atom forms. The nuclear binding energy is the energy produced when the atoms’ nucleons are bound together;...
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization01:12

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization

Error is the deviation of the obtained result from the true, expected value or the estimated central value. Errors are expressed in absolute or relative terms.
Absolute error in a measurement is the numerical difference from the true or central value. Relative error is the ratio between absolute error and the true or central value, expressed as a percentage.
Errors can be classified by source, magnitude, and sign. There are three types of errors: systematic, random, and gross.
Systematic or...
Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error01:10

Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error

The atomic mass of an element varies due to the relative ratio of its isotopes. A sample's relative proportion of oxygen isotopes influences its average atomic mass. For instance, if we were to measure the atomic mass of oxygen from a sample, the mass would be a weighted average of the isotopic masses of oxygen in that sample. Since a single sample is not likely to perfectly reflect the true atomic mass of oxygen for all the molecules of oxygen on Earth, the mass we obtain from this particular...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

DEL2PH4: Predictive 3D Pharmacophores from DNA-Encoded Library Screening Data.

ACS medicinal chemistry letters·2026
Same author

A Pharmacophore-Based Method for Rapid and Accurate Virtual Screening of Antibody Libraries against Antigens.

Molecular pharmaceutics·2025
Same author

Improved Accuracy for Modeling PROTAC-Mediated Ternary Complex Formation and Targeted Protein Degradation <i>via</i> New <i>In Silico</i> Methodologies.

Journal of chemical information and modeling·2020
Same author

AutoPH4: An Automated Method for Generating Pharmacophore Models from Protein Binding Pockets.

Journal of chemical information and modeling·2020
Same author

Fragment Hits: What do They Look Like and How do They Bind?

Journal of medicinal chemistry·2019
Same author

In Silico Modeling of PROTAC-Mediated Ternary Complexes: Validation and Application.

Journal of chemical information and modeling·2019
Same journal

Advancing Biochemical Molecule Registration, Representation and Search for New Drug Modalities.

Journal of chemical information and modeling·2026
Same journal

A Unified Molecular Graph and Protein Language Model Framework for Predicting Human Drug-Hormone Receptor Interactions with Structure-Aware Validation.

Journal of chemical information and modeling·2026
Same journal

Intricate Role of Cholesterol in Membrane Fusion.

Journal of chemical information and modeling·2026
Same journal

tmGNN-XAI: An Explainable Graph Neural Network Tool for Predicting Electronic Properties of Transition Metal Complexes from SMILES.

Journal of chemical information and modeling·2026
Same journal

QSAR in the Browser: An Interactive Cheminformatics Web Application.

Journal of chemical information and modeling·2026
Same journal

FoldDoF: Utilizing the Primary Degrees of Freedom of Protein Backbone for Geometric Modeling and Generation.

Journal of chemical information and modeling·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 16, 2026

Computation of Atmospheric Concentrations of Molecular Clusters from ab initio Thermochemistry
12:11

Computation of Atmospheric Concentrations of Molecular Clusters from ab initio Thermochemistry

Published on: April 8, 2020

Numerical errors in minimization based binding energy calculations.

Miklos Feher1, Christopher I Williams

  • 1Campbell Family Institute for Breast Cancer Research, University Health Network, Toronto, ON M5G 1L7, Canada. mfeher@uhnres.utoronto.ca

Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
|November 14, 2012
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Small input changes in molecular mechanics generalized Born surface area (MM-GBSA) calculations can cause large, unpredictable shifts in computed binding energies. This sensitivity, especially with protein flexibility, highlights challenges in reliable drug discovery simulations.

More Related Videos

Exploring Caspase Mutations and Post-Translational Modification by Molecular Modeling Approaches
05:56

Exploring Caspase Mutations and Post-Translational Modification by Molecular Modeling Approaches

Published on: October 13, 2022

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 16, 2026

Computation of Atmospheric Concentrations of Molecular Clusters from ab initio Thermochemistry
12:11

Computation of Atmospheric Concentrations of Molecular Clusters from ab initio Thermochemistry

Published on: April 8, 2020

Exploring Caspase Mutations and Post-Translational Modification by Molecular Modeling Approaches
05:56

Exploring Caspase Mutations and Post-Translational Modification by Molecular Modeling Approaches

Published on: October 13, 2022

Area of Science:

  • Computational chemistry
  • Molecular modeling
  • Drug discovery

Background:

  • Molecular mechanics generalized Born surface area (MM-GBSA) methods are widely used for predicting ligand-binding energies.
  • Accurate binding energy prediction is crucial for efficient drug discovery and development.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the impact of small input perturbations on binding energy calculations using MM-GBSA methods.
  • To identify the sources of numerical instability in these simulations.

Main Methods:

  • Applied small perturbations to ligand coordinates (translations and atom permutations) in binding site.
  • Utilized Prime MM-GBSA and MOE MM-GB/VI computational approaches.
  • Incorporated protein flexibility into MM-GBSA calculations.

Main Results:

  • Minor input changes (e.g., 0.1 Å translation) led to significant binding energy variations (up to 17 kcal/mol).
  • Binding energies clustered around discrete values corresponding to specific ligand poses.
  • Increased sensitivity and numerical instability were observed when including protein flexibility, particularly due to protein strain terms.

Conclusions:

  • MM-GBSA calculations are highly sensitive to small input perturbations, potentially yielding unreliable binding energy predictions.
  • Ligand pose multiplicity and protein flexibility significantly contribute to computational instability.
  • Limiting the flexible region in protein-flexible MM-GBSA calculations to within 6 Å is advisable to mitigate instability.