Parameterized

Suppose that x [Q)) is the adiabatic eigenstate of the Hamiltonian H[q]Q), dependent on internal variables q (the electronic coordinates in molecular contexts), and parameterized by external coordinates Q (the nuclear coordinates). Since x Q)) must satisfy... 

The time dependence of the molecular wave function is carried by the wave function parameters, which assume the role of dynamical variables [19,20]. Therefore the choice of parameterization of the wave functions for electronic and nuclear degrees of freedom becomes important. Parameter sets that exhibit continuity and nonredundancy are sought and in this connection the theory of generalized coherent states has proven useful [21]. Typical parameters include molecular orbital coefficients, expansion coefficients of a multiconfigurational wave function, and average nuclear positions and momenta. We write... 

For this reason, there has been much work on empirical potentials suitable for use on a wide range of systems. These take a sensible functional form with parameters fitted to reproduce available data. Many different potentials, known as molecular mechanics (MM) potentials, have been developed for ground-state organic and biochemical systems [58-60], They have the advantages of simplicity, and are transferable between systems, but do suffer firom inaccuracies and rigidity—no reactions are possible. Schemes have been developed to correct for these deficiencies. The empirical valence bond (EVB) method of Warshel [61,62], and the molecular mechanics-valence bond (MMVB) of Bemardi et al. [63,64] try to extend MM to include excited-state effects and reactions. The MMVB Hamiltonian is parameterized against CASSCF calculations, and is thus particularly suited to photochemistry. 

The choice of parameterization and the design of a discretization method are not independent Some choices of parameters will facilitate symplec-tic/reversible discretization while others may make this task very difficult or render the resulting scheme practically useless because of the computational expense involved. 

The quantum degrees of freedom are described by a wave function /) = (x, t). It obeys Schrodinger s equation with a parameterized coupling potential V which depends on the location q = q[t) of the classical particles. This location q t) is the solution of a classical Hamiltonian equation of motion in which the time-dependent potential arises from the expectation value of V with regard to tp. For simplicity of notation, we herein restrict the discussion to the case of only two interacting particles. Nevertheless, all the following considerations can be extended to arbitrary many particles or degrees of freedom. 

A force field does not consist only of a mathematical eiqjression that describes the energy of a molecule with respect to the atomic coordinates. The second integral part is the parameter set itself. Two different force fields may share the same functional form, but use a completely different parameterization. On the other hand, different functional forms may lead to almost the same results, depending on the parameters. This comparison shows that force fields are empirical there is no "correct form. Because some functional forms give better results than others, most of the implementations within the various available software packages (academic and commercial) are very similar. 

For each pair of interacting atoms (/r is their reduced mass), three parameters are needed D, (depth of the potential energy minimum, k (force constant of the par-tictilar bond), and l(, (reference bond length). The Morse ftinction will correctly allow the bond to dissociate, but has the disadvantage that it is computationally very expensive. Moreover, force fields arc normally not parameterized to handle bond dissociation. To circumvent these disadvantages, the Morse function is replaced by a simple harmonic potential, which describes bond stretching by Hooke s law (Eq. (20)). 

It is noteworthy that it is not obligatory to use a torsional potential within a PEF. Depending on the parameterization, it is also possible to represent the torsional barrier by non-bonding interactions between the atoms separated by three bonds. In fact, torsional potentials and non-bonding 1,4-interactions are in a close relationship. This is one reason why force fields like AMBER downscale the 1,4-non-bonded Coulomb and van der Waals interactions. 

In contrast to the point charge model, which needs atom-centered charges from an external source (because of the geometry dependence of the charge distribution they cannot be parameterized and are often pre-calculated by quantum mechanics), the relatively few different bond dipoles are parameterized. An elegant way to calculate charges is by the use of so-called bond increments (Eq. (26)), which are defined as the charge contribution of each atom j bound to atom i. 

The first quantum mechanical improvement to MNDO was made by Thiel and Voityuk [19] when they introduced the formalism for adding d-orbitals to the basis set in MNDO/d. This formalism has since been used to add d-orbitals to PM3 to give PM3-tm and to PM3 and AMI to give PM3(d) and AMl(d), respectively (aU three are available commercially but have not been published at the time of writing). Voityuk and Rosch have published parameters for molybdenum for AMl(d) [20] and AMI has been extended to use d-orbitals for Si, P, S and Q. in AMI [21]. Although PM3, for instance, was parameterized with special emphasis on hypervalent compounds but with only an s,p-basis set, methods such as MNDO/d or AMI, that use d-orbitals for the elements Si-Cl are generally more reliable. 

Molecular dipole moments are often used as descriptors in QPSR models. They are calculated reliably by most quantum mechanical techniques, not least because they are part of the parameterization data for semi-empirical MO techniques. Higher multipole moments are especially easily available from semi-empirical calculations using the natural atomic orbital-point charge (NAO-PC) technique [40], but can also be calculated rehably using ab-initio or DFT methods. They have been used for some QSPR models. 

This quantity is found to be related to the local polarization energy and is complementary to the MEP at the same point in space, making it a potentially very useful descriptor. Reported studies on local ionization potentials have been based on HF ab-initio calculations. However, they could equally well use semi-empirical methods, especially because these are parameterized to give accurate Koopmans theorem ionization potentials. 

A molecular modeling and simulation package with various implemented force field parameterizations. Free of charge for academic use. Available for different platforms. 

Using semi-einpirical methods, which are also based on approximate solutions of the Schrodingcr equation but use parameterized equations, the computation times can be reduced by twu orders of magnitude. HyperChem from Hypercubc,... 

The classical introduction to molecular mechanics calculations. The authors describe common components of force fields, parameterization methods, and molecular mechanics computational methods. Discusses th e application of molecular mechanics to molecules comm on in organic,and biochemistry. Several chapters deal w ith thermodynamic and chemical reaction calculations. 

The accuracy of a molecular mechanics or seim-eni pineal quantum mechanics method depends on the database used to parameterize the method. This is true for the type of molecules and the physical and chemical data in the database. Frequently, these methods give the best results for a limited class of molecules or phen omen a. A disad van tage of these methods is that you m u si have parameters available before running a calculation. Developing param eiers is time-consuming. 

The five semi-empirical methods in TlyperChem differ in many technical details. Treatm eii i of electron-electron in leraction s is one ma or dislin gnish m g featnre. Anoth er imporlaii 1 dislingnish-ing feature is the approach used to parameterize the methods. Based on the methods used for obtaining parameters, the XDO methods fall into two classes ... 

---