Big Chemical Encyclopedia

Chemical substances, components, reactions, process design ...

Articles Figures Tables About

Structures computer optimized model

Zamora, J. M. and I. E. Grossmann. Continuous Global Optimization of Structured Process Systems Models. Comput Chem Eng 22 1749-1770 (1998). [Pg.414]

The quantitative comparison of the optimized 3D structure of a selected set of ligands allows the development of their minimal 3D structural requirements for the recognition and activation of the biological target, that is, the pharmacophore hypothesis, and gives a sound 3D rationale to the available SARs [21]. A more complete and mechanistically relevant approach to the development of the 3D pharmacophore consists in its translation into a numerical molecular descriptor that quantifies the molecular-pharmacophore similarity-diversity for computational QSAR modeling [21,41]. [Pg.159]

This is, however, an illustration of the importance of taking adsorbate deformations into account, and the usefulness of theoretical modelling for doing so. A computationally optimized 1 shifted adsorption geometry is shown in figure 5 (right), and this has an adsorbate orientation very close to the desired 45°, and not the simplistically expected 60°. Instead, the deformed 2 shift structure does not have a 45° orientation, but rather one of 35°. [Pg.228]

A primary, or unbiased, library is a large set of compounds (t5q)ically thousands to millions) based on diversity and aimed at the discovery of samples of interest for targets for which little, if any, information is available. Diversity is a concept unrelated to the library size that attempts to evaluate the representation of chemical space by a chemical library using computational methods If this space is sampled evenly by the components of a library, then this library is considered to be diversity based (Fig. 4.1, left). A focused, or biased, library is a similarity-based set of compounds (typically hundreds to thousands) aimed at the discovery and optimization of lead structures for a target for which a structural model on which to design the hbrary is available. Similarity is a concept unrelated to the library size that is opposite to diversity if the library components are clustered around the model structure A, the library is similarity based (see Fig. 4.1, right). [Pg.137]

NMR spectroscopy is a very useful tool for determining the local chemical surroundings of various atoms. Komin et al studied theoretically this for the adenine molecule of Fig. 20 both in vacuum and in an aqueous solution using different computational approaches. In all cases, density-functional calculations were used for the adenine molecule, but as basis functions they used either a set of localized functions (marked loc in Table 45) or plane waves (marked pw). Furthermore, in order to include the effects of the solvent they used either the polarizable continuum approach (marked PCM) or an explicit QM/MM model with a force field for the solvent and a molecular-dynamics approach for optimizing the structure (marked MD). In that case, the chemical shifts were calculated as averages over 40 snapshots from the molecular-dynamics simulations. Finally, in one case, an extra external potential from the solvent acting on the solute was included, too, marked by the asterisk in the table. [Pg.111]

To reduce the errors to a minimum (to zero is virtually impossible), one normally embarks on a refinement process of one sort or another. With a good starting model containing no serious errors, but only lots of small ones, and some of the powerful refinement programs available today, the entire refinement process may be completed over lunchtime. This is, however, rarely the case. Usually one refines a model, examines the resultant structure in various ways to determine if some local rebuilding is called for, and then refines that, hopefully, improved model. Thus most refinement procedures alternate computational refinement with manual rebuilding until an optimal model is achieved. An optimal model emerges when you can think of no way to improve it further. [Pg.219]


See other pages where Structures computer optimized model is mentioned: [Pg.48]    [Pg.58]    [Pg.48]    [Pg.58]    [Pg.119]    [Pg.147]    [Pg.697]    [Pg.380]    [Pg.42]    [Pg.257]    [Pg.167]    [Pg.185]    [Pg.147]    [Pg.50]    [Pg.160]    [Pg.167]    [Pg.115]    [Pg.330]    [Pg.175]    [Pg.179]    [Pg.12]    [Pg.160]    [Pg.61]    [Pg.157]    [Pg.1102]    [Pg.164]    [Pg.384]    [Pg.306]    [Pg.260]    [Pg.147]    [Pg.368]    [Pg.193]    [Pg.242]    [Pg.28]    [Pg.211]    [Pg.591]    [Pg.184]    [Pg.546]    [Pg.305]    [Pg.600]    [Pg.236]    [Pg.414]    [Pg.111]    [Pg.18]    [Pg.548]    [Pg.185]   
See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.41 ]




SEARCH



Computer optimization

Optimal structure

Optimism model

Optimization models

Optimization structural

Optimization structure

Optimized structure

Optimizing Structures

Structure computation

© 2024 chempedia.info