Showing posts with label science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label science. Show all posts

Sunday, 17 March 2013

DPG Spring Conference in Regensburg

So I'm sat in bed with a rather lovely headache as my dear wife brings me tea and medicated beverages. Of course this headache is all part of the post-conference cold I got. Yay!

So what can I say about the week (yeah long conference)? Well Regensburg is a very beautiful city, and what with the light snow we had there, even more so. The cathedral and the historical town all give it a feeling, for me, of it being much like York and Verona. I can also now say I am not a fan of Bavarian food. Far too heavy and fatty. But we did find a good bar that was not a Brauhaus, and a great little Italian cafe, and a excellent Thai restaurant.

Now for the conference, which is the German Physical Chemistry meeting. So a lot of the science focuses on surface science, material science, and the simulation of these systems with Density Functional Theory. The stand out talks for me were the one on Metal Organic Frameworks, and one on the use of big data to search for novel materials using machine learning. For the latter I got to speak to the presenter, who was very excited that I brought up the topic of Bader type analysis/Atoms in Molecules/Quantum Chemical Topology and if he was using it for his method - somehting that they have just started and something that I have a bit of knowledge on having done my PhD in one of the groups in the world which are experts on AIM/QCT.

So yeah a good conference, nice new contacts, learnt my modifications of a DFT program are now in the official version, and well a nice city to have visited.

Oh and Sam has a new lovely hair cut - this being the same hairdressers that serve us both drinks (yeah I get to sit there as she cuts a cut and a colour, it's a good time for reading a book) and they also gave me a free hair product to try out with spiking my hair.

Friday, 20 July 2012

New type of chemical bond may form in extreme magnetic fields of stars | Ars Technica

Artist's impression of a neutron star, showing the intense magnetic field lines (in blue) surrounding it. Such strong magnetic fields could create a new type of molecule.

Bonds between atoms are electrical in character: atoms share electrons or mutually ionize, creating an attractive force binding them together. However, researchers are now suggesting that it may be possible to generate magnetic bonds, resulting in stable molecules of different types than exist on Earth. While these molecules can't be produced with even our strongest laboratory magnets, they could form in the extreme magnetic fields near white dwarfs and neutron stars, and their unique spectral signatures may make them visible through observations.

As described in a new Science paper, Kai K. Lange, E. I. Tellgren, M. R. Hoffmann, and T. Helgaker performed detailed quantum mechanical calculations for two atoms in exceedingly strong magnetic fields. While previous work had shown that a relatively weak bond could form when the molecule is parallel to the magnetic field, Lange and colleagues discovered an additional stronger bond might result when the molecule is perpendicular. Their calculation relied on very few assumptions, so it is useful for determining the properties of the molecules formed. Intriguingly, their model also described a magnetic molecule could be made from helium, which is famously inert and doesn't form stable electric bonds.

Why are magnetic fields so extreme?


White dwarfs are the dense cores of stars similar to our Sun that shed their outer layers after exhausting their nuclear fuel. Neutron stars are the even denser remains of stars at least 8 times more massive than the Sun; they form when the star's core collapses as the star exploded in a supernova. In both cases, the small size of the stellar remnant and the high density combine to intensify the magnetic field near the surface.

The strongest laboratory magnets can produced magnetic field strengths of about 40 Teslas (40T). However, fields surrounding white dwarfs can be a thousand times greater, and neutron star field strengths are even stronger. (For comparison, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) machines may run as high as 7T, and Earth's magnetic field ranges from 25 to 65 microteslas.) In other words, the magnetic environment near extreme stellar remnants is substantially different than anything we can produce on Earth, so it's unsurprising that at least some new phenomena could arise in such a setting.

The authors used a common method in molecular chemistry and physics known as an full configuration-interaction (FCI) calculation, in which atoms are modeled directly with a minimum of assumptions. In this way, they were able to obtain all the possible molecular binding configurations. They focused on hydrogen, which has the twin advantages of being simple (one electron per atom) and common. At low temperatures and negligible electric or magnetic fields, hydrogen forms the two-atom molecule H2 through covalent bonding, where the electrons are shared equally between the two atoms. However, the environment around white dwarfs and neutron stars is too hot for this bond to survive, and the molecules dissociate.

Intense magnetic fields could change that, based on the FCI analysis. As the magnetic field strength increased, the researchers found the electron orbitals (the patterns of the electron cloud of an atom) distorted, making the atoms themselves magnetic. This effect, known as paramagnetism, is seen in many materials: they are magnetic only in the presence of an external field (as opposed to ferromagnets—"permanent magnets"—which don't require an external field). In the case of hydrogen atoms in extreme magnetic fields, the result of the paramagnetism was the formation of an H2 molecule that's held together through magnetic bonding.

While previous calculations had found magnetic bonding when the two atoms were oriented perpendicular to a magnetic field, they didn't show bonding in other orientations. The new results revealed the bonds persist when the atoms are rotated by any angle relative to the field, though the perpendicular orientation was still preferred. Additionally, in the earlier results, bonding was due to motion of the electrons, not a paramagnetic effect. The differences arise because of the approximations used in the earlier work used, which are not present in the current one.

The researchers also performed FCI calculations for helium, which only forms molecules under extreme conditions—and even then the results are highly unstable. They found magnetic bonds were possible, meaning quasi-stable paramagnetic He2 could exist. As with H2, however, the molecules were found to break apart when the external field was turned off.

Because of the fundamentally different character of magnetic H2, its spectrum—the wavelengths of light absorbed and emitted—will be different than the spectrum of covalent H2. Similarly, magnetic He2 has a unique spectrum. If magnetic molecules exist in the atmospheres of white dwarfs or neutron stars, they might be detectable, assuming they are produced in sufficient quantities.

While current laboratory magnetic fields aren't strong enough to create magnetic molecules, new pulsed magnetic fields are able to achieve higher strengths for brief periods of time. While the molecules would only persist as long as the field was switched on, future experiments should be able to hunt for their predicted spectra.

Science, 2012. DOI: 10.1126/science.1219703 and 10.1126/science.1224869 (About DOIs).

Well this is new and different

Sunday, 13 November 2011

World of Darkness and the Science of Evil

World of Darkness and the Science of Evil

World of Darkness (WoD), both new and classic settings, has a primary focus on supernatural horror. Monsters are things from myths, from our past, Biblical or from our folklore. They are urban legends and ghosts of old, or quite simply men driven mad and have become something new.
But horror and terror are not just born from magic and the arcane arts and powers of forgotten gods. Horror can be born from science.

In classic WoD (CWoD) a war exists between science and magic, fought by the Technocracy and the Tradition mages. It is a war of belief and absolute truths and control. And so magic and science are different simply by definition and categorization. They come from the same source. The difference is the lens through which the truth is viewed. Spirits, ghosts, aliens, vampires etc, are just entities for which the science is not fully defined.
This view of science and the supernatural is also within new World of Darkness (NWoD), but the presentation is more fuzzy. There is no war between magic and science. Without that analogue in Mage the Awakening, science and magic bleed over into each other in many different ways. It is the interface between the two which can be exciting and lead to different horrors.

So what am I getting at?

The supernatural and scientific can blend together to give birth to new horrors. In CWoD  we saw this with the Hitmarks of the Technocracy. They are cyborgs powered and designed using hyperscience, Enlightened Science, which is simply magic manifesting as technology. In NWoD there similar concepts in Promethean the Created. Each Promethean lineage is aligned to an element (earth, air, fire, water, spirit). But the also present the concept of Prometheans born of nuclear energy and radiation. There are also those Promethean which are cybernetic. Essentially androids, but made human like by the Divine Fire. In Hunter the Vigil there are groups that turn to science to fight the supernatural, making use of advanced weapons to fight the things in the dark.

So can science give birth to things that in fact mimic or tap into supernatural powers, or can the reverse  happen? Why not. Can science modify the supernatural, and the reverse? Well yeah.

Some of may favourite story seeds look at things like this. For example, in the Chicago book for NWoD, they talk about Bell Laboratories and the particle accelerator there. Because of the cutting edge science being used the suggest the idea that such machines tear open the skin of reality and allow in strange energies, material and entities. These entities could easily fit the definitions of spirits, or even aliens, or the Fae. In Night Horrors: Wolfsbane, this idea is further expanded upon when detailing the Idigam. These banished spirits consumed the powers of spirits that rode to the moon from other worlds. This along with the book Summoners for Mage the Awakening, and of course the concepts in Changeling the Lost, allow you to play on the question, ‘Just what are spirits?’ Are some spirits really just inter dimensional beings? Can you clone from them? What about demons and angels? Are they just other forms of aliens? Are those were creatures just some sort of cryptid? Perhaps just a mutation? We know there are ghosts, but what about ghosts from alien worlds brought to earth on a comet? What does vampirism mean in light of blood research and stem cell science?

So my advice for games? If you want to through your gaming group a curve ball add a bit of science. There are things in the world that science has yet to explain but can be used to fight. But there are things not understood that science has created.


So some random story seeds to use:

  •  
    • An organ transplant from a werewolf leads to something strange and murderous.
    • Cloning of a changeling leads to something more like a fetch.
    • Quantum teleportation allows for a exponential spread of a spirit.
    • From the depth of space comes a signal that follows Atlantean magic, but sent by a race from another world.
    • A supernova sends energy, in the form of flux, to earth, and awakens Pandorans.

Posted via email from Etheric Labs at http://doctorether.posterous.com

Thursday, 6 October 2011

How to disappear two Nobel Prize medals (and how to bring them back)

How to disappear two Nobel Prize medals (and how to bring them back)

When the Nazis invaded Copenhagen in 1940, physicist Niels Bohr was in possession of two Nobel Prize medals. But they were not his medals. The first belonged to Max von Laue, winner of the 1914 Prize for physics, the second to James Franck, the physics winner in 1925.

Not wanting to attract unwanted attention to themselves, each had sent his medal to Bohr's lab in Copenhagen for safekeeping. But with Nazis marching through the streets of the city, the medals now posed a particularly serious threat to Bohr. NPR's Robert Krulwich writes:

Inconveniently, [these medals were] now sitting in Bohr's building, clearly inscribed "Von Laue"...and "Franck" — like two death warrants. Bohr's institute had attracted and protected Jewish scientists for years. The Nazis knew that, and Niels Bohr knew (now that Denmark was suddenly part of the Reich) that he was a target. He had no idea what to do.

On the day the Nazis came to Copenhagen, a Hungarian chemist named Georgy de Hevesy (he would one day win a Nobel of his own) was working in Bohr's lab. He wrote later, "I suggested that we should bury the medal(s)," but Bohr thought no, the Germans would dig up the grounds, the garden, search everywhere in the building. Too dangerous.

So Hevesy's thoughts turned to chemistry. Maybe he could make the medals disappear. He took the first one, he says, and "I decided to dissolve it. While the invading forces marched in the streets of Copenhagen, I was busy dissolving Laue's and also James Franck's medals."

It was a painstakingly slow process (gold is a notoriously stable element), but Hevesy managed to pull it off; when the Nazis ransacked Bohr's institute, they found no trace of the medals.

Or rather, they never noticed them. The gold from the two medals had been dissolved into a bright orange, but otherwise unassuming, liquid. A liquid that the Nazis left untouched. A liquid that Hevesey later extracted the gold from and sent back to the Nobel Foundation to have recast into two brand-spanking-new medals.

The moral of the story? Science wins, bitches.

Check out the full story on how Hevesy saved the day, including a video on how to dissolve gold, over at NPR
Top image by Benjamin Arthur via NPR

Thursday, 15 September 2011

Speak Out With Your Geek Out - From Country Kid to Computational Scientist #speakgeek #chemistry

So Speak Out With Your Geek Out is still on going this week. Last post was a history of my own gaming and geek life and how it has led to what I do now as a postdoctoral researcher.

Cover_new
Above image was the cover image to the Journal of Physical chemistry where my literature review on neural networks and chemical simulations appeared.

I have already estabished that at school, out in the the courtyside of Herefordshire, I was quite an enthusiast for science, technology and mathematics. That is not to say I did not enjoy art, graphical design and history, but I excelled at the sciences. For A-Levels (for those in the US that is the equivalent of the last 2 years of high school, but over here we specialize in a few subjects, and for my time that was just 3) I took Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics. My Mum to a degree forced me into doing maths, on the grounds that no matter what I did at university it would come in handy. She was not wrong.

 

My love of Physics really comes from my childhood obsession with space. I loved how the solar system was, how planets were so different and similar, and at how man had left the confines of this world to explore others. A part of me as a child wanted to be an astronaut, or some form of astronomer. But as high school went on I could see possible choices like engineer or theoretical physicist. However there was chemistry.

 

Chemistry is a weird science if ever there was one. It sits are the threshold of all the others. Not all scientists wear white lab coats, and not all chemists are the same. Not all work in labs slaving over making new colourful liquids or bubbling, steaming pots of solutions. No there are a lot of boring steps to be taken in the creation of new chemicals. However, there are many forms of chemistry. There are surface chemists, biochemists, bioinorganic chemists, nano scientists, this list being very long.

 

What captured my imagination in Chemistry, was the links between it and Physics and in turn Mathematics. Quantum Mechanics. This strange area of science, ruled by particle wave waves, and strange physics, is the very science that puts electrons in their place around atoms, and in turn determines how chemistry happens. I was just struck by the beauty of the equations that determined the motion of these particle/waves. And so it was this that made me do Chemistry as a degree. But of course a particular type of chemistry.

 

Now I had applied to the Univeristy of Manchester Institute for Science and Technology (it was a one of a few such institutes) for a Masters in Chemistry. This was originally a B B C entry requirement, that based on the interview for the course, was reduced to B C C, with a B in Chemistry. That of course was achieved (I got a A in Maths, and two Bs).

 

But the course I was doing was not normal chemistry. It was Chemistry with Chemical Physics. Chemical Physics I had learnt during my hunt for university courses, was an area of chemistry where computers were used to model and analyse chemicals. It would mean I would learn programming and deal with Quantum Mechanics.

 

Of course in an ideal world you get to study exactly the way you want to. However, being such a nerd I was one of a few who were doing that exact course. Meaning that in the first few years of the degree I got to study specialized modules in Quantum Mechanics etc.However, Chemistry has a high level of attrition amongst the students. By the later years I was really the only person doing that course. This was an issue as the specialist course were not always an option for me to take due to not enough interest in them. This meant often I was doing other optional courses that were more synthetic in focus. This was and issue as it caused a drop in my overall grade averages. One thing I did learn through team projects is that I disliked doing synthetic chemistry. It would either yeild very small amounts of the desired product, or turn to brown goo. This was why I prefered physical chemistry and theoretical chemistry. it was all the formulas that described the chemical bonds and how molecules move about.

 

So for my final thesis for my Masters, I did a project on the design of a new, multipolar electrostatic, water model. How can I explain all this concisely? Water is a the most fundamental of all molecules. It is the medium for life, and is essential for the understanding for many other important chemical systems and physical properties (like how ice freezes). So what exactly was I doing?

 

Slide1
Above is the way water molecules organise in the liquid. This structure is constantly shifting in the liquid, but becomes rigid in ice.

 

Water has been modelled since the start of Computational Chemistry, back in the 70s. Water models assumed a number of things. Water molecules are rigid (molecules are anything but rigid). Water molecules don't break bonds (this is a massive simplification - water molecules are constantly exchanging hydrogen atoms and making and breaking hydrogen bonds - these being weak interactions between the water oxygen atoms and the hydrogen atoms on another water molecule. Even if we models did do this, they assumed that hydrogen atoms move like normal atoms, but in fact hydrogen atoms are so small and light they move in non-Newtonian ways i.e. Quantum Mechanically).

 

Electron-shells
Above is a diagram to show how electrons fill atomic shells. The number of electrons in a outer shell determines the chemistry. Atoms react and bond so that they complete a shell either by losing electrons or gaining them. For example, Carbon, has 4 out electrons. It reacts to form 4 bonds. In each bond it shares one electron from itself and another from the bonding partner atom. Thus in total Carbon has 8 electrons in total. A complete shell.

Water molecules can be described using points charges placed on the atoms. Oxygen atoms carry a partial negative charge, while the hydrogen atoms carry partial positive charges (this explains the above mentioned hydrogen bonds). These partial charges simplify the true distribution of electrons about the water molecules. The old models assume these charges never. However, these charge distributions do change, in response to bonds being made and broken, and in fact changes to the local environment of the molecules. This is called polarization (something I will get back to later).

 

Ts
Above a typical water model. It has the bond lengths and geometry. Note that water has a triangular shape. The toal charge of the molecule is 0. But the oxygen atom has a partial negative charge, and the hydrogens have partial positive charges.

 

So what was my model. My model used a more realistic representation of the electrons and where they are located, something called a electron density. These are 3D representations of the charge density and you can imagine the analogue with respect to say pressure of temperature.

New_microsoft_office_powerpoint_presentation
Above is the molecule, imidazole, and the gradient vector field of its electron density. Note the field lines are the lines tha end at the dots (atoms). The isobars represent lines containing equal electron density. The thick curved lines are interatomic boundaries. Note how they curve. This means atoms are not round things when in molecules. They deform each other. The image is the same for computational determination as it is if you measured the same thing by x-ray diffraction. In fact the computer calculated version is more accurate.

Slide1
The above image is similar to the previous. This time for two water molecules. One water molecule, on the right, lies in the place of the 2D plot. The othe is at right angles to it, with the hydrogen atoms sitcking out of the image. Note how the left water molecule oxygen atom deforms the hydrogen atom of the right hand water molecule.

New_microsoft_office_powerpoint_presentation

A 3D representation of the atomis of three water molecules within a cluster of 21 water molecules. Red volumes/atoms are oxygen atoms, white are hydrogen atoms. The solid atoms belong to the central water molecule of the cluster, while the two neighbouring molecules have transparent wire-framed atoms.

This project not only saw me learn more about quantum mechanics and use such programs to generate data using the equations of quantum mechanics, but I also learnt about programming, Fortran, in order program the models and modify them so that using Newtonian equations of motion I could test if the water models recovered the expect structures of water that have been previously been measured using X-ray diffraction.

 

The work for this revealed some interesting results which I would then make use of in my PhD with the same group. The PhD was offered to me so long as I got a 2.1. Thank fuck I did.

 

Getting a PhD was a life changing experience. First of all having funding and money is good. Especially when you go from three grand a year to twelve. My PhD involved learning more programming and the fundamentals of AI, in particular neural networks. The new project was 'The design of a novel polarizable water model trained on ab initio electron densities'.

 

What hell does that all mean?

 

Let's go back to the old work. Remember I said the model assumed that the charge densities don't change, and that was a simplification? Well this new model of mine woud address that. The neural networks are computer algorithms that can learn things from the data presented to them. So what data is that?

 

Ab initio is the latin for 'first principles' i.e. quantum mechanics. I generated thousands (and that takes some time) of quantum data for various water clusters i.e. 2-6 water molecules in different arrangements where one molecule is surrounded by the rest. The data for these clusters shows that the electron density is distorted due to the placement of the water molecules. Why? Remember I said that the atoms have partial charges? Well that means that water molecules interact in such a way that the partial charges either push (negatively charge atoms do this) or push neighbouring electron density in other molecules. This distortion of electron density is known as polarization (I hope you note that a lot of these terms can be looked up on wikipedia).

 

So this means that each water molecule, and its electron density, are unique to the environment and organisation of that environment i.e. what stuff is about it and how they are pointing at each other. A neural network can be trained to related the positions and relative orientations to the electron densities found for these examples. In effect the neural network can predict during the simulation of water the electron densities, and in effect allow for the water molecules to be polarized.

 

Neural-network
Above is a basic neural network. They are an analogue to how brain neurons work. The circles, nodes, pass numbers along (left to right). These numbers are multiplied by things called weights i.e. how important a the number is, and used to calculate an output. A neural network 'learns' by modifying these weights so that once it has been trained to predict the output for some test examples, it can then be used to predict the output for other sets of inputs representing the other variations you wish to use.

 

Are we still following? Well this work is now being applied to a model for peptides (short chains of amino acids that if you make big enough can curl up and become proteins) and for water with ions (salt water is a good start).

 

So then I finished at the University of Manchester (a merger of UMIST and the Victoria University of Manchester) and have almost finished a postdoc at Warwick University. Here I have been developing models for spin crossover compounds.

 

Spin Crossover???

 

OK. So there are these types of atoms in the periodic table called transtition metals. These metals are called so because they can easily under go a transition from one oxidation state to another. That means they can lose a variable number of electrons when forming different complexes. For example iron can happily form compounds where in some it has lost 2 electrons, and in some 3, and in others even more. This means that in the two states it prefers different compound geometries i.e. what shapes it forms when binding to other atoms, it also has different colours in the two states, which in turn are further modified by the atoms it is bound to. For example rust is red because it is iron in the 3+ (i.e. lost three electrons) state. This is why our blood is also red when oxygenated. Really, go look up transition metals and see why they do so much stuff and are so important to life and science.

 

26_iron
Above shows the outer shell electron structure of iron. Electrons are arrows. The lines are orbitals. Transition Metals break all the rules. Sothey have a 4s shell that holds 2 electrons and a 3d shell that can hold 10 electrons. Both shells are similar in energy. When iron is oxidised, it looses the the 4s electrons first (becoming a 2+ state). It will then loose one of the pair electrons in the 3d shell to form the 3+ state.

 

Now the other thing that transition metals can do is occupy different spin states. This means that while the oxidation state is the same, the electrons in the outer shell of the atom (the outer shell of the atom determines the chemistry of an atom) can be forced to change their arrangement. In turn this means that they can favour different geometries with the atoms to which they are bound. It can also mean they can be trapped in either spin state. (Spin is a property that electrons have. It is either up or down. Electrons can only be in the same orbital if they are of opposite spin. Now per orbital there are two electrons of each spin. This is stable. But pairing electrons decreases stability because electrons are negatively charged. It's like putting two north poles against each other. So then it is also favoured to have electrons spread out, one per orbital if possible. So there can be a number of ways to spread the electrons.

One is where as many electrons are paired up - low spin, and one is where as many are not paired up - high spin).

 

Sc

Above is the 3d shell for the iron in the 2+ state. What you need to know is that when iron binds with atoms you will find some of the orbitals (those lines the electrons are on) are higher in energy than others. Now here is the trick. You gain stability with the electrons in the lower energy orbitals. But you loose energy pairing electrons. So the you can spread them out (LS being low spin as the spins are all cancelled out, HS being high spin where there are more up spin than down spin). But that means putting electrons in less stable, higher energy orbitals. So there is a clever balance here that deteremines if the high spin or low spin state is preffered. It depends on how unstable i.e. how much higher in energy the upper orbitals are. If the pay off is not enough then LS state is preffered. Of course this energy difference, and thus preference can be modified by changing what iron is bound to.

 

What does this change of spin state allow for? Well spin states can be switched between if the material adsorbs a gas, or is heated, or is compressed, or is hit by a laser light. What can we do with this? The spin state can be used as a form of switch, like in memory in hard drives. Or perhaps as sensors for gases. They can even be used for optics.

 

So what am I doing for this. Well many of these models need settings to be determined for the functions that model these systems. Now this not trivial when there are 30 or more that need to be found so that the parameters can be used to model the compounds in both low and high spin states. Now, to find these, since there are many combinations, I have been using genetic algorithms (a way of varying bit string representations of the parameters) to search the parameter space to fit the models.

 

What makes it harder is that the fitting of the parameters must achieve two goals. The first being good energy predicitions for the test compounds, and the other being good recovery of the compound geometries. These two goals are in competition i.e. you can fit the models to get one really good while getting shit results in the other. This issue is know as multi-objective fitting. This is now going to be applied to a number of problems, and will in future be used for some other things.

 

My future work in Bochum, Germany, returns to my PhD work or neural networks, and I will be using it to simulate transition metal catalytic surfaces. This means I am drawing upon my old skills and pushing the work further forward since my old work and this new work are comparable and can be combined.

 

 

But why do we do this? 

 

In 2003, the cost of developing a new drug was estimated at $800 million, with a predicted 7.4% increase in costs per year, the development of a new drug will now require around around $1 billion.

 Typically, it takes over a decade for a drug to be brought to the market because only a couple of potential drugs out of 10,000 make it to the market. Moreover, it can be difficult recoup the money put into the research and the drug may be recalled when it makes it to the patient population. Subsequently, drug development and production needs to become more efficient. This can be achieved through the use of computational chemistry Computers have become ever cheaper and faster. It is, therefore, now feasible to run moderate sized simulations on a commercially available desktop computer. By using the computational tools available, and developing new computational approaches, drug design can be made more efficient and successful.

 

So I guess that means what I do should hopefully help save lives, or save the world. No really.

 

So there we go. My Speak Out With My Geek Out about Chemistry

 

Speak Out With Your Geek Out - From Country Kid to Computational Scientist #speakgeek #chemistry

So Speak Out With Your Geek Out is still on going this week. Last post was a history of my own gaming and geek life and how it has led to what I do now as a postdoctoral researcher.

Cover_new
Above image was the cover image to the Journal of Physical chemistry where my literature review on neural networks and chemical simulations appeared.

I have already estabished that at school, out in the the courtyside of Herefordshire, I was quite an enthusiast for science, technology and mathematics. That is not to say I did not enjoy art, graphical design and history, but I excelled at the sciences. For A-Levels (for those in the US that is the equivalent of the last 2 years of high school, but over here we specialize in a few subjects, and for my time that was just 3) I took Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics. My Mum to a degree forced me into doing maths, on the grounds that no matter what I did at university it would come in handy. She was not wrong.

 

My love of Physics really comes from my childhood obsession with space. I loved how the solar system was, how planets were so different and similar, and at how man had left the confines of this world to explore others. A part of me as a child wanted to be an astronaut, or some form of astronomer. But as high school went on I could see possible choices like engineer or theoretical physicist. However there was chemistry.

 

Chemistry is a weird science if ever there was one. It sits are the threshold of all the others. Not all scientists wear white lab coats, and not all chemists are the same. Not all work in labs slaving over making new colourful liquids or bubbling, steaming pots of solutions. No there are a lot of boring steps to be taken in the creation of new chemicals. However, there are many forms of chemistry. There are surface chemists, biochemists, bioinorganic chemists, nano scientists, this list being very long.

 

What captured my imagination in Chemistry, was the links between it and Physics and in turn Mathematics. Quantum Mechanics. This strange area of science, ruled by particle wave waves, and strange physics, is the very science that puts electrons in their place around atoms, and in turn determines how chemistry happens. I was just struck by the beauty of the equations that determined the motion of these particle/waves. And so it was this that made me do Chemistry as a degree. But of course a particular type of chemistry.

 

Now I had applied to the Univeristy of Manchester Institute for Science and Technology (it was a one of a few such institutes) for a Masters in Chemistry. This was originally a B B C entry requirement, that based on the interview for the course, was reduced to B C C, with a B in Chemistry. That of course was achieved (I got a A in Maths, and two Bs).

 

But the course I was doing was not normal chemistry. It was Chemistry with Chemical Physics. Chemical Physics I had learnt during my hunt for university courses, was an area of chemistry where computers were used to model and analyse chemicals. It would mean I would learn programming and deal with Quantum Mechanics.

 

Of course in an ideal world you get to study exactly the way you want to. However, being such a nerd I was one of a few who were doing that exact course. Meaning that in the first few years of the degree I got to study specialized modules in Quantum Mechanics etc.However, Chemistry has a high level of attrition amongst the students. By the later years I was really the only person doing that course. This was an issue as the specialist course were not always an option for me to take due to not enough interest in them. This meant often I was doing other optional courses that were more synthetic in focus. This was and issue as it caused a drop in my overall grade averages. One thing I did learn through team projects is that I disliked doing synthetic chemistry. It would either yeild very small amounts of the desired product, or turn to brown goo. This was why I prefered physical chemistry and theoretical chemistry. it was all the formulas that described the chemical bonds and how molecules move about.

 

So for my final thesis for my Masters, I did a project on the design of a new, multipolar electrostatic, water model. How can I explain all this concisely? Water is a the most fundamental of all molecules. It is the medium for life, and is essential for the understanding for many other important chemical systems and physical properties (like how ice freezes). So what exactly was I doing?

 

Slide1
Above is the way water molecules organise in the liquid. This structure is constantly shifting in the liquid, but becomes rigid in ice.

 

Water has been modelled since the start of Computational Chemistry, back in the 70s. Water models assumed a number of things. Water molecules are rigid (molecules are anything but rigid). Water molecules don't break bonds (this is a massive simplification - water molecules are constantly exchanging hydrogen atoms and making and breaking hydrogen bonds - these being weak interactions between the water oxygen atoms and the hydrogen atoms on another water molecule. Even if we models did do this, they assumed that hydrogen atoms move like normal atoms, but in fact hydrogen atoms are so small and light they move in non-Newtonian ways i.e. Quantum Mechanically).

 

Electron-shells
Above is a diagram to show how electrons fill atomic shells. The number of electrons in a outer shell determines the chemistry. Atoms react and bond so that they complete a shell either by losing electrons or gaining them. For example, Carbon, has 4 out electrons. It reacts to form 4 bonds. In each bond it shares one electron from itself and another from the bonding partner atom. Thus in total Carbon has 8 electrons in total. A complete shell.

Water molecules can be described using points charges placed on the atoms. Oxygen atoms carry a partial negative charge, while the hydrogen atoms carry partial positive charges (this explains the above mentioned hydrogen bonds). These partial charges simplify the true distribution of electrons about the water molecules. The old models assume these charges never. However, these charge distributions do change, in response to bonds being made and broken, and in fact changes to the local environment of the molecules. This is called polarization (something I will get back to later).

 

Ts
Above a typical water model. It has the bond lengths and geometry. Note that water has a triangular shape. The toal charge of the molecule is 0. But the oxygen atom has a partial negative charge, and the hydrogens have partial positive charges.

 

So what was my model. My model used a more realistic representation of the electrons and where they are located, something called a electron density. These are 3D representations of the charge density and you can imagine the analogue with respect to say pressure of temperature.

New_microsoft_office_powerpoint_presentation
Above is the molecule, imidazole, and the gradient vector field of its electron density. Note the field lines are the lines tha end at the dots (atoms). The isobars represent lines containing equal electron density. The thick curved lines are interatomic boundaries. Note how they curve. This means atoms are not round things when in molecules. They deform each other. The image is the same for computational determination as it is if you measured the same thing by x-ray diffraction. In fact the computer calculated version is more accurate.

Slide1
The above image is similar to the previous. This time for two water molecules. One water molecule, on the right, lies in the place of the 2D plot. The othe is at right angles to it, with the hydrogen atoms sitcking out of the image. Note how the left water molecule oxygen atom deforms the hydrogen atom of the right hand water molecule.

New_microsoft_office_powerpoint_presentation

A 3D representation of the atomis of three water molecules within a cluster of 21 water molecules. Red volumes/atoms are oxygen atoms, white are hydrogen atoms. The solid atoms belong to the central water molecule of the cluster, while the two neighbouring molecules have transparent wire-framed atoms.

This project not only saw me learn more about quantum mechanics and use such programs to generate data using the equations of quantum mechanics, but I also learnt about programming, Fortran, in order program the models and modify them so that using Newtonian equations of motion I could test if the water models recovered the expect structures of water that have been previously been measured using X-ray diffraction.

 

The work for this revealed some interesting results which I would then make use of in my PhD with the same group. The PhD was offered to me so long as I got a 2.1. Thank fuck I did.

 

Getting a PhD was a life changing experience. First of all having funding and money is good. Especially when you go from three grand a year to twelve. My PhD involved learning more programming and the fundamentals of AI, in particular neural networks. The new project was 'The design of a novel polarizable water model trained on ab initio electron densities'.

 

What hell does that all mean?

 

Let's go back to the old work. Remember I said the model assumed that the charge densities don't change, and that was a simplification? Well this new model of mine woud address that. The neural networks are computer algorithms that can learn things from the data presented to them. So what data is that?

 

Ab initio is the latin for 'first principles' i.e. quantum mechanics. I generated thousands (and that takes some time) of quantum data for various water clusters i.e. 2-6 water molecules in different arrangements where one molecule is surrounded by the rest. The data for these clusters shows that the electron density is distorted due to the placement of the water molecules. Why? Remember I said that the atoms have partial charges? Well that means that water molecules interact in such a way that the partial charges either push (negatively charge atoms do this) or push neighbouring electron density in other molecules. This distortion of electron density is known as polarization (I hope you note that a lot of these terms can be looked up on wikipedia).

 

So this means that each water molecule, and its electron density, are unique to the environment and organisation of that environment i.e. what stuff is about it and how they are pointing at each other. A neural network can be trained to related the positions and relative orientations to the electron densities found for these examples. In effect the neural network can predict during the simulation of water the electron densities, and in effect allow for the water molecules to be polarized.

 

Neural-network
Above is a basic neural network. They are an analogue to how brain neurons work. The circles, nodes, pass numbers along (left to right). These numbers are multiplied by things called weights i.e. how important a the number is, and used to calculate an output. A neural network 'learns' by modifying these weights so that once it has been trained to predict the output for some test examples, it can then be used to predict the output for other sets of inputs representing the other variations you wish to use.

 

Are we still following? Well this work is now being applied to a model for peptides (short chains of amino acids that if you make big enough can curl up and become proteins) and for water with ions (salt water is a good start).

 

So then I finished at the University of Manchester (a merger of UMIST and the Victoria University of Manchester) and have almost finished a postdoc at Warwick University. Here I have been developing models for spin crossover compounds.

 

Spin Crossover???

 

OK. So there are these types of atoms in the periodic table called transtition metals. These metals are called so because they can easily under go a transition from one oxidation state to another. That means they can lose a variable number of electrons when forming different complexes. For example iron can happily form compounds where in some it has lost 2 electrons, and in some 3, and in others even more. This means that in the two states it prefers different compound geometries i.e. what shapes it forms when binding to other atoms, it also has different colours in the two states, which in turn are further modified by the atoms it is bound to. For example rust is red because it is iron in the 3+ (i.e. lost three electrons) state. This is why our blood is also red when oxygenated. Really, go look up transition metals and see why they do so much stuff and are so important to life and science.

 

26_iron
Above shows the outer shell electron structure of iron. Electrons are arrows. The lines are orbitals. Transition Metals break all the rules. Sothey have a 4s shell that holds 2 electrons and a 3d shell that can hold 10 electrons. Both shells are similar in energy. When iron is oxidised, it looses the the 4s electrons first (becoming a 2+ state). It will then loose one of the pair electrons in the 3d shell to form the 3+ state.

 

Now the other thing that transition metals can do is occupy different spin states. This means that while the oxidation state is the same, the electrons in the outer shell of the atom (the outer shell of the atom determines the chemistry of an atom) can be forced to change their arrangement. In turn this means that they can favour different geometries with the atoms to which they are bound. It can also mean they can be trapped in either spin state. (Spin is a property that electrons have. It is either up or down. Electrons can only be in the same orbital if they are of opposite spin. Now per orbital there are two electrons of each spin. This is stable. But pairing electrons decreases stability because electrons are negatively charged. It's like putting two north poles against each other. So then it is also favoured to have electrons spread out, one per orbital if possible. So there can be a number of ways to spread the electrons.

One is where as many electrons are paired up - low spin, and one is where as many are not paired up - high spin).

 

Sc

Above is the 3d shell for the iron in the 2+ state. What you need to know is that when iron binds with atoms you will find some of the orbitals (those lines the electrons are on) are higher in energy than others. Now here is the trick. You gain stability with the electrons in the lower energy orbitals. But you loose energy pairing electrons. So the you can spread them out (LS being low spin as the spins are all cancelled out, HS being high spin where there are more up spin than down spin). But that means putting electrons in less stable, higher energy orbitals. So there is a clever balance here that deteremines if the high spin or low spin state is preffered. It depends on how unstable i.e. how much higher in energy the upper orbitals are. If the pay off is not enough then LS state is preffered. Of course this energy difference, and thus preference can be modified by changing what iron is bound to.

 

What does this change of spin state allow for? Well spin states can be switched between if the material adsorbs a gas, or is heated, or is compressed, or is hit by a laser light. What can we do with this? The spin state can be used as a form of switch, like in memory in hard drives. Or perhaps as sensors for gases. They can even be used for optics.

 

So what am I doing for this. Well many of these models need settings to be determined for the functions that model these systems. Now this not trivial when there are 30 or more that need to be found so that the parameters can be used to model the compounds in both low and high spin states. Now, to find these, since there are many combinations, I have been using genetic algorithms (a way of varying bit string representations of the parameters) to search the parameter space to fit the models.

 

What makes it harder is that the fitting of the parameters must achieve two goals. The first being good energy predicitions for the test compounds, and the other being good recovery of the compound geometries. These two goals are in competition i.e. you can fit the models to get one really good while getting shit results in the other. This issue is know as multi-objective fitting. This is now going to be applied to a number of problems, and will in future be used for some other things.

 

My future work in Bochum, Germany, returns to my PhD work or neural networks, and I will be using it to simulate transition metal catalytic surfaces. This means I am drawing upon my old skills and pushing the work further forward since my old work and this new work are comparable and can be combined.

 

 

But why do we do this? 

 

In 2003, the cost of developing a new drug was estimated at $800 million, with a predicted 7.4% increase in costs per year, the development of a new drug will now require around around $1 billion.

 Typically, it takes over a decade for a drug to be brought to the market because only a couple of potential drugs out of 10,000 make it to the market. Moreover, it can be difficult recoup the money put into the research and the drug may be recalled when it makes it to the patient population. Subsequently, drug development and production needs to become more efficient. This can be achieved through the use of computational chemistry Computers have become ever cheaper and faster. It is, therefore, now feasible to run moderate sized simulations on a commercially available desktop computer. By using the computational tools available, and developing new computational approaches, drug design can be made more efficient and successful.

 

So I guess that means what I do should hopefully help save lives, or save the world. No really.

 

So there we go. My Speak Out With My Geek Out about Chemistry

 

Wednesday, 27 July 2011

Madness ensues!

So right now I am sat here with some form of bug, feeling sick, burning eyes, and attempting to work. I have read the paper I am reviewing and need to do some more perhaps later at home. However, I am also trying to organize (read 'smash head against wall') a job in Bochum. It would be the perfect job. Good location, and good standard of living.

 

However, I am no more info on the contract. I need to know the pay, the tax breaks, and most importantly the relocation costs they cover. I had that covered when I moved from Manchester to Leamington Spa. Not that far, but still you need to cover costs like deposits and and so forth. Moving to Bochum, Germany must surely mean I have some, if not more costs covered? Well I am still in the dark on that one. Hopefully it will be sorted out soon, as in the end of the week, as I am meant to be going over there on the 10th to have a interview/informal meeting. I am pretty much the best candidate for the position and so I should be getting this easy.

 

Worst case. Borrowing money of family. But if I am being paid more over there then I can pay back people like my mother-in-law (she is just awesome) and my sister, quicker.

Monday, 18 April 2011

All the visual effects from BBC's Wonders of the Universe in one eye-popping video

Alasdair WilkinsAll the visual effects from BBC's Wonders of the Universe in one eye-popping video Set aside fifteen minutes for this incredible collection of all the visual effects from the recent documentary Wonders of the Universe. It's got everything from close-ups of Earth and the Sun to exploding stars, black holes, and vast galactic vistas.

These effects were created by BDH for the four-part documentary series Wonders of the Universe, which aired earlier this year on the BBC. BDH has now collected and released their entire collection of simulations and artist's conceptions of the universe's various phenomena, complete with backing music from Timo Baker. They haven't released a description of what exactly all the various things in the video are, but NASA's Astronomy Photo of the Day site is making a start:

Some stills in the video are easily identified, such as the Hubble image of the Carina Nebula that occurs at about 2:22, the Crab Nebula at about 7:45, and the Cat's Eye Nebula that occurs at about 8:16. A pan away from a spiral galaxy occurs at about 4:00, and breathtaking vistas of the spiral occur until past 5:00. Pulsars and supernovas seem to take over at about 9:00 and are truly spectacular. Binary star systems containing a pulsar and an accretion disk occur beginning at about 14:30. Past that, the entire computer animated video seems to sparkle with unknown stars, unknown planets, and sequences where unknown gas is flowing toward unknown places. What, for example, is being depicted at 13:00?

The site is asking people to help identify all the various images, which will all go into an updated, annotated version of this original video. Anyone interested can help them out with that here.

Via NASA.

This is one excellent video!

Wednesday, 19 January 2011

Birthday fun and more

So yesterday was my birthday. I turned 28 years old. It first made me think, "Fuck, I am getting old", but really I have come to the conclusion of so what. I think most of this realization of age comes from some people I know still being immature, and that others of my age are having children. But, there are a group of us, all about the same age who are quite happily do the growing up thing while maintaining some sense of fun. But if there is one thing that has changed it is that I am sick of collecting junk. I want things to be replaced with items that will last, not lots of cheap crap that will fall apart. That sounds rather middle aged perhaps, but I think it is just a symptom of me being more aware of what I earn and what I would like to spend it on, while I watch others piss it away.

Anyway, lets forget the gloom of growing old, and realize it is only others that make us feel gloomy about it. The same people who would say I got married too young etc.

My birthday celebrations took place over this last weekend, and involved the meeting of new members of my roleplay group. Kat and David met up with the established group of myself, Sam, Heather, Steve, Emily and Chris, at our haunt of choice in Leamington, Wilde's. We also had the pleasure of my good friend, and ex-player in our group, James, staying over and so he was also present for drinks.

Wildes, being a classy wine bar, suffers from it's own success, drawing in the cackling fiends from the streets. The towny trendy types that drone on very loudly. We eventually got seating, all of us about a tiny table much to the annoyance of the orc like patrons of the bar.

The day after we bid goodbye to James, but hello to Anna and Mark. Mark is celebrating his birthday today, and yes we are born a day apart. It was quite the revelation when we met plus explained a few things. We again enjoyed drinks at Wilde's, with Mark's own addition of Essex style quotes in an effort to annoy the others there who again seem to speak in a loud riotous fashion. All we could hear was Mark's quote of the day, in Essex style accent, "You're holding the biscuits wrong!". Instead of remaining at the bar we chose to leave, watch some movies, rant and drink and eat nice food. Plus there was the compulsory playing with the kittens, who now seem to be at a bit of a loss after the two nights of guests at the flat.

Present wise I have received so far some money, a collection of DVDs from James, and Anna and Mark, a copy of Chez Goth (which is great) and some dice (James hoping that at least one of the presents I needed).

Monday was equally good fun, as I and David attended the local Cafe Scientifique in Leamington, where the topic was AI. We had fun asking quite a few questions, since we both have knowledge on a broad range of things. It seems I  and he are now headed hunted for duties there in the future, and he will be presenting his research there in a few weeks time.

Work wise the paper is almost there, and I am now researching a new possible route for the development of molecular switches, which is seems could well mean we are the first to propose the use of these materials for this task. Very exciting and should form the basis of my next research funding application.

 

Of course, finally this Friday will see the return of Changeling for gaming, since we have been on pause for a number of weeks. It'll be good to get back into the swing of things and also get ready for running Vampire.

 

Finally a picture of Yamato that I posted to icanhazcheezburger

 

 

Eggsact sciantz, Mr Angier,    iz not an eggsact sciantz.

Friday, 29 October 2010

Freezing of science budget could hit UK's global reputation | Left Foot Forward

Freezing of science budget could hit UK’s global reputation

The freezing of the £4.6 billion budget for scientific research could mean a cut of 8.9 per cent in real terms – though it could have been a lot worse. “It’s not as bad as we were expecting” was the general consensus among scientists at a Young Fabians policy network event this week on the impact of the Comprehensive Spending Review in on research and development and science.

Scientific-researcherStephen Grungeberg, chairman of the Labour Finance and Industry Group, said that there continues to be an “implied threat” over the heads of scientists – budgets for scientific research in departments other than the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) and the Department for Health are not ring fenced and are still awaiting their fate.

In addition to the budget the freeze, the government’s decision to close regional development agencies represented as a major blow to small and medium sized enterprises, according to Professor Evan Parker from the Department of Physics at the University of Warwick. There were also worries Britain would slip down the global league table.

Professor Parker added:

“We are looked to by the scientific world. We are respected for academic excellence, and until recently, we had very well financially supported research and development by the government.

“If we are to keep our global position in pioneering R&D, Westminster politicians must keep up with counterparts such as China, Singapore and even other European member states such as France.

“Germany is now increasing its science budget by seven per cent. President Obama has committed three per cent of American GDP to scientific research – a doubling of the budget as part of the economic stimulus package.

“The general public too must recognise the necessity of financial support and scientific industries to retain pressure on the government to continue adequate financial support.”

The immigration cap that the coalition plans to expand shortly was described as the most worrying direction that the government is going in. Parker said the arbitrary cap on the number of economic migrants from outside the European Union being allowed into the country to work was bad for businesses, for the economy and for scientific R&D:

He explained how:

“… this policy will block and deter the best of the scientific world from working in the UK.”

The teaching of science was also criticised, with John Unsworth, chair of Scientists for Labour, suggesting reforms to the A Level system to encourage young people to study a mixture of arts and scientific subjects, and Imran Khan, director of the Campaign for Science, saying:

“Uninspired and uninspiring teachers are failing to capture children’s imaginations and are therefore turning them away from the sciences from a young age. We also have concerns for the coalition’s academy policy, which will give schools complete autonomy from the national curriculum…

“Imagine a world without vaccinations or the internet. Imagine a world without electricity or aeroplanes. Imagine a world without science.”

Thursday, 7 October 2010

Concept Phone Made From Copper Charges in Pockets Using a Thermogenerator

Call for ban on codeine - health - 07 October 2010 - New Scientist

THE widely used painkiller codeine doesn't work in some people and can be fatal in others, so its use should be halted, say researchers at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada.

Codeine works by being metabolised to morphine in the body, but the extent of that metabolism depends on a person's genetic make-up, so the amount of morphine produced varies.

In an editorial published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal this week, Stuart MacLeod and Noni MacDonald say the problem is especially relevant for infants, citing examples of two children who died after being given codeine following a tonsillectomy, and two studies that show non-fatal toxicity to infants being breastfed by mothers taking codeine.

The Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, Canada, has stopped using codeine. The authors are calling for others to follow suit.

The UK Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency currently has no plans to stop codeine being sold over the counter. "As only 1 to 2 per cent of the population has an enhanced metabolism most patients could continue to take codeine," says Florence Palmer of the MHRA.

Issue 2781 of New Scientist magazine

  • Like what you've just read?
  • Don't miss out on the latest content from New Scientist.
  • Get New Scientist magazine delivered to your door, plus unlimited access to the entire content of New Scientist online.
  • Subscribe now and save
0diggsdigg

print

send

If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.

Have your say

Only subscribers may leave comments on this article. Please log in.

All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.

If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.

Not good, both in terms of the risks, and the fact that I find this pain killer works for me compared to paracetamol.

Wednesday, 19 May 2010

28 Days: Special Tampon Can Save Humanity – Mademoicell – Jezebel

This is quite mad but also really interesting. Once more a reminder that the human body does contain all the tools to heal it self from the afflictions that kill us everyday, the trick is making use of them in ways never thought of before.

Posted via web from Doctor Ether's posterous

Tuesday, 18 May 2010

Thursday, 11 February 2010

Update

Well since last time I posted a real update my dear wife [info][info]glittersavvy has been busy with her new job at the uni and we have had the pleasure of being able to spend more time together. It also means the future is somewhat more exciting as we can afford to go on holiday etc, the first of which is for our 1 year anniversary of being married, and we are going to York for a few days next weekend. IT should eb really good fun as we will also get a chance to see Nix and Tofu.

On the work front I am still coding away, getting nearer to that first Warwick paper, while also working hard on my first research proposal, and preparing for applying to EPSRC for more funding. I have also been getting a few chances to do some teaching, only helping in tutorials, but it is all good fun.

But I have now been able to sign off on my literature review paper. I have seen the final cover proof of the journal, and it will appear in print on March 18th in JPCA. I also have news that another paper is being put together based on my work at Manchester. This would bring papers from my PhD to 8. And this one would be the fucking icing on the cake as the models I developed are applied to long timescale simulations to obtain macroscopic water properties. Quite good timing considering the cover article on New Scientist this week.

IN other news roleplay for this year has been restarted, and the chronicle now nears the first major event. Setting shaking stuff. All this is on [info]etheric_labs

Otherwise we have had the pleasure of having James M stay over for the weekend, [info]glittersavvy photobook by [info]aiko273. It's called The Orpheum Circuit. Aiko is extremely talented and the book looks stunning. Maybe some of you might consider buying a copy? You can do so here, as well as preview the book: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/detail/1147613

Add to that her nice new hair which I love!

So all in all not a bad few weeks!

Wednesday, 27 January 2010

The proof of the cover of Journal of Physical Chemistry A - My image made the cover



So this is what the cover of the journal will look like with my cover image... hoorah!!

The work in the paper is based upon my PhD project, a literature review.

Here is the abstract:

Potential Energy Surfaces Fitted by Artificial Neural Networks


Chris M. Handley, and Paul L.A. Popelier*

Molecular Mechanics is the tool of choice for the modelling of systems that are so large or complex that it is impractical or impossible to model them by ab initio methods. For this reason there is a need for accurate potentials that are able to quickly reproduce ab initio quality results at the fraction of the cost. The interactions within force fields are represented by a number of functions. Some interactions are well understood and can be represented by simple mathematical functions while others are not so well understood and their functional form is represented in a simplistic manner or not even known. In the last 20 years there have been the first examples of a new design ethic, where novel and contemporary methods using machine learning, in particular artificial neural networks, have been used to find the nature of the underlying functions of a force field. Here we appraise what has been achieved over this time and what requires further improvements, while offering some insight and guidance for the development of future force fields.