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

Predicting Molecular Geometry02:27

Predicting Molecular Geometry

42.8K
VSEPR Theory for Determination of Electron Pair Geometries
42.8K
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

7.1K
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...
7.1K
Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error01:10

Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error

1.1K
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...
1.1K
Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization01:12

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization

7.9K
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...
7.9K
Uncertainty: Overview00:59

Uncertainty: Overview

1.3K
In analytical chemistry, we often perform repetitive measurements to detect and minimize inaccuracies caused by both determinate and indeterminate errors. Despite the cares we take, the presence of random errors means that repeated measurements almost never have exactly the same magnitude. The collective difference between these measurements - observed values - and the estimated or expected value is called uncertainty. Uncertainty is conventionally written after the estimated or expected value.
1.3K
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

14.1K
Scientists always try their best to record measurements with the utmost accuracy and precision. However, sometimes errors do occur. These errors can be random or systematic. Random errors are observed due to the inconsistency or fluctuation in the measurement process, or variations in the quantity itself that is being measured. Such errors fluctuate from being greater than or less than the true value in repeated measurements. Consider a scientist measuring the length of an earthworm using a...
14.1K

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Accurate density functional theory for noncovalent interactions in charged systems.

Science advances·2026
Same author

Analyzing density-driven errors: Principles and pitfalls.

The Journal of chemical physics·2026
Same author

Real-space machine learning of correlation density functionals.

Nature communications·2025
Same author

Møller-Plesset Adiabatic Connection Theory for Diverse Noncovalent Interactions.

The journal of physical chemistry letters·2025
Same author

"Slim" Benchmark Sets for Faster Method Development.

Journal of chemical theory and computation·2025
Same author

Exact MoÌ·ller-Plesset Adiabatic Connection Correlation Energy Densities.

Journal of chemical theory and computation·2025
Same journal

Electronegative, Transparent, and Flexible Triboelectric Electrodes via Three-Dimensionally Stacked Interconnect Structure with Cross-Interface Electron Transport.

The journal of physical chemistry letters·2026
Same journal

Effects of Ether Bonds on Liquid-Liquid Transitions in Quaternary Ammonium and Phosphonium Ionic Liquids under High Pressure.

The journal of physical chemistry letters·2026
Same journal

Origins of Size-Dependent Kinetics in Microdroplets.

The journal of physical chemistry letters·2026
Same journal

Iso-Potential <i>Operando</i> Coupling of XRD and a Profile Reactor: Structural Insights into ZnPd/ZnO during Methanol Steam Reforming.

The journal of physical chemistry letters·2026
Same journal

Formation of Methanol Clathrate Hydrate in Simulated Interstellar Ices.

The journal of physical chemistry letters·2026
Same journal

Suppressing Residual Low-Dimensional Phases in Bromide Perovskite LEDs Using a Dimethyl Phosphate Ionic Liquid.

The journal of physical chemistry letters·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Dec 1, 2025

High Precision FRET at Single-molecule Level for Biomolecule Structure Determination
11:24

High Precision FRET at Single-molecule Level for Biomolecule Structure Determination

Published on: May 13, 2017

11.1K

Quantifying and Understanding Errors in Molecular Geometries.

Stefan Vuckovic1, Kieron Burke1,2

  • 1Department of Chemistry, University of California, Irvine, California 92697, United States.

The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters
|November 10, 2020
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

A new measure, the geometry energy offset (GEO), quantifies errors in computational chemistry geometries. GEO provides a unified view of geometric inaccuracies, aiding method comparison and cost reduction for high-level calculations.

More Related Videos

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

8.5K
Author Spotlight: Exploring Cellular Processes by Modeling Ligands in Cryo-EM Maps
09:30

Author Spotlight: Exploring Cellular Processes by Modeling Ligands in Cryo-EM Maps

Published on: July 19, 2024

1.8K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Dec 1, 2025

High Precision FRET at Single-molecule Level for Biomolecule Structure Determination
11:24

High Precision FRET at Single-molecule Level for Biomolecule Structure Determination

Published on: May 13, 2017

11.1K
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

8.5K
Author Spotlight: Exploring Cellular Processes by Modeling Ligands in Cryo-EM Maps
09:30

Author Spotlight: Exploring Cellular Processes by Modeling Ligands in Cryo-EM Maps

Published on: July 19, 2024

1.8K

Area of Science:

  • Computational chemistry
  • Quantum chemistry
  • Theoretical chemistry

Background:

  • Electronic structure calculations are essential in chemistry but contain inherent errors in energies and geometries.
  • Accurately quantifying geometric errors across multiple parameters (bond angles, lengths) is complex.
  • Existing methods lack a unified approach to assess geometric deviations.

Purpose of the Study:

  • Introduce a single, natural measure for geometric errors in computational chemistry.
  • Develop a tool to rank different computational methods based on geometric accuracy.
  • Provide quantitative insights into specific geometric parameter errors and method trends.

Main Methods:

  • Introduction of the geometry energy offset (GEO) as a novel metric.
  • Application of GEO to assess errors in various electronic structure calculation methods.
  • Analysis of GEO's correlation with specific geometric parameters (bond angles, lengths).

Main Results:

  • GEO provides a unified measure linking disparate geometric errors.
  • A new ranking of computational methods based on geometric accuracy is established.
  • GEO offers quantitative insights into errors in bond angles and lengths for different methods.
  • Demonstrated GEO's utility in reducing the cost of high-level geometry optimizations.
  • Identified instances where geometric errors significantly distort overall method accuracy.

Conclusions:

  • The geometry energy offset (GEO) offers a powerful and versatile tool for evaluating geometric accuracy in computational chemistry.
  • GEO facilitates more reliable method selection and understanding of error propagation.
  • This metric aids in optimizing computational resources and improving the predictive power of theoretical chemistry.