Back

A Quantum Lens on Molecular Design: A Machine-Learned Energy Function from Interacting Quantum Atoms.

Hoffmann, M.; Kazimir, A.; Oesterreich, T.; Kaermer, L.; Engelberger, F.; Meiler, J.; Lamers, C.

2026-03-05 bioinformatics
10.64898/2026.03.03.709242 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Accurate predictions of the interactions (covalent bonds and non-covalent contacts between atoms) in a molecular system require scalable, accurate, and interpretable energy functions. While classical force fields and knowledge-based energy functions struggle to capture key electronic effects, quantum chemistry approaches such as density functional theory (DFT) provide the necessary accuracy but remain computationally demanding. Furthermore, gaining insight into interactions requires energy decomposition schemes. The Interacting Quantum Atoms (IQA) scheme is exceptionally attractive, offering a chemically intuitive, electron density (ED) topologically based separation into intra- and interatomic contributions, however its high computational cost remains a significant barrier for application to larger systems or tasks like ligand screening in drug discovery. We address these limitations by introducing a novel machine learning (ML) framework to predict accurate energies derived from the IQA scheme together with a comprehensive dataset of molecular systems and their calculated IQA decomposed energies. It enables the rapid and accurate prediction of DFT single point energies and dissects these energies in a physically meaningful and chemically intuitive manner. Our method predicts all intra-atomic energies and inter-atomic interaction energies (covalent and non-covalent) within a defined distance cutoff, providing an energy function that decomposes the total energy into specific atomic contributions. This advance makes the IQA method viable for analyzing interaction energies in applications previously inaccessible due to computational expense, such as elucidating ligand-binding mechanisms and informing rational drug design.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
207 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
38.3%
2
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 3%
9.3%
3
The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters
58 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.9%
50% of probability mass above
4
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
216 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.7%
5
Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
126 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.6%
6
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 43%
2.9%
7
Advanced Science
249 papers in training set
Top 7%
2.9%
8
The Journal of Physical Chemistry B
158 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.8%
9
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 47%
2.5%
10
Chemical Science
71 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.4%
11
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 13%
2.4%
12
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 29%
1.9%
13
Biophysical Journal
545 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
14
Nano Letters
63 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
15
Journal of Cheminformatics
25 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.3%
16
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.0%
17
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 64%
0.9%
18
Journal of Computational Chemistry
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
19
Nucleic Acids Research
1128 papers in training set
Top 17%
0.8%
20
Communications Chemistry
39 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
21
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 28%
0.7%
22
BMC Bioinformatics
383 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
23
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 40%
0.5%