Paper detail

Comparison of the TIP4P-2005, SWM4-DP and BK3 interaction potentials of liquid water with respect to their consistency with neutron and X-ray diffraction data of pure water

Following a fairly comprehensive study on popular interaction potentials of water (Pusztai et al., J. Chem. Phys., 2008, 129, 184103), here two more recent polarizable potential sets, SWM4-DP (Lamoureux et al., Chem. Phys. Lett., 2006, 418, 245) and BK3 (Kiss et al., J. Chem. Phys., 2013, 138, 204507) are compared to the TIP4P-2005 water potential (Abascal et al., J. Chem. Phys., 2005, 123, 234505) that had previously appeared to be most favoravble. The basis of comparison was the compatibility with the results of neutron and X-ray diffraction experiments on pure water, using the scheme applied by Pusztai et al. (2008). The scheme combines the experimental total scattering structure factors (TSSF) and partial radial distribution functions (PRDF) from molecular dynamics simulations in a single structural model. Goodness-of-fit values to the O-O, O-H and H-H simulated PRDF-s and to the experimental neutron and X-ray TSSF provided a measure that can characterize the level of consistency between interaction potentials and diffraction experiments. Among the sets of partial RDF-s investigated here, the ones corresponding to the SWM4-DP potential parameters have proven to be the most consistent with the particular diffraction results taken for the present study, by a hardly significant margin ahead of BK3. Perhaps more importantly, it is shown that the three sets of potential parameters produce nearly equivalent PRDF-s that may all be made consistent with diffraction data at a very high level. The largest differences can be detected in terms of the O-O partial radial distribution function.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.