Benchmarking various types of partial atomic charges for classical all-atom simulations of metal-organic frameworks
1IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, New York 10598, USA. bluan@us.ibm.com.
Abstract:
The density derived electrostatic and chemical (DDEC) approach for calculating the charges of atoms in a metal-organic framework (MOF) is considered to be the most accurate (yet computationally costly) one among many charge-assignment methods. Here, we conducted a comparative study on five different types of atomic partial charges (namely CM5, Mulliken, Qeq, EQeq and PACMOF) prepared for a subset of MOFs with affordable computational costs and benchmarked them with respect to the DDEC charges, which is particularly relevant because currently most databases lack MOFs with pre-calculated DDEC charges. To find a suitable charge type alternative to the DDEC approach, we statistically ranked the five charge types based on two metrics, the relative standard deviation of charges and relative dipole moment difference, based on which we provide general guidance as well as suggestions for specific MOFs according to bond polarity analyses. Finally, we recommend a possible and more accurate parametrization scheme for future studies.
Related Concept Videos
Crystal Field Theory - Octahedral Complexes
To explain the observed behavior of transition metal complexes (such as colors), a model involving electrostatic interactions between the electrons from the ligands and the electrons in the unhybridized d orbitals of the central metal atom has been developed. This electrostatic model is crystal field theory (CFT). It helps to understand, interpret, and predict the colors, magnetic behavior, and some structures of coordination compounds of transition metals.
CFT focuses on...
Crystal Field Theory - Tetrahedral and Square Planar Complexes
Crystal field theory (CFT) is applicable to molecules in geometries other than octahedral. In octahedral complexes, the lobes of the dx2−y2 and dz2 orbitals point directly at the ligands. For tetrahedral complexes, the d orbitals remain in place, but with only four ligands located between the axes. None of the orbitals points directly at the tetrahedral ligands. However, the dx2−y2 and dz2 orbitals (along the Cartesian axes) overlap with the ligands less than the dxy,...
Molecular Models
Valence Bond Theory
Molecular Orbital Theory II
Formal Charges


