pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.03140 · v1 · pith:KUXDET6Onew · submitted 2026-06-02 · ⚛️ physics.chem-ph

SEDACS: A Scalable Framework for Complex Chemistry Simulations

Cheng-Han Li , Joshua Finkelstein , Maksim Kulichenko , Rae A. Corrigan Grove , Sergei Tretiak , Michael E. Wall , Anders M.N. Niklasson , Christian F.A. Negre This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 08:25 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.chem-ph
keywords SEDACSgraph-based electronic structurelinear-scaling QMDshadow molecular dynamicslarge-scale simulationsdensity functional tight-bindingparallel subgraph decomposition
0
0 comments X

The pith

SEDACS enables stable long-time quantum molecular dynamics on systems of tens of thousands of atoms by decomposing electronic connectivity graphs into parallel overlapping subgraphs.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper introduces SEDACS as a Python framework that couples graph-based linear-scaling electronic structure methods with shadow molecular dynamics in an extended-Lagrangian form. It builds an adaptive graph whose edges capture non-local electronic overlap between atoms, then partitions the graph into smaller overlapping subgraphs whose electronic structures are solved independently and in parallel by external codes. This construction rests on the nearsightedness of electronic interactions in non-metallic systems and is designed to preserve accuracy while achieving linear scaling. The result is that existing electronic-structure packages can now run stable simulations on chemically active systems that previously exceeded their practical limits.

Core claim

SEDACS integrates tunable graph construction, where edges encode non-local electronic overlap, with decomposition into overlapping subgraphs solved independently in parallel; when paired with shadow molecular dynamics it produces stable quantum molecular dynamics trajectories for systems containing tens of thousands of atoms, and does so by interfacing with external electronic-structure solvers through minimal code changes.

What carries the argument

The adaptive graph whose edges represent non-local electronic overlap, decomposed into smaller overlapping subgraphs that are solved independently and in parallel.

If this is right

  • Stable QMD trajectories become feasible for chemically active systems with tens of thousands of atoms.
  • Existing electronic-structure packages can be coupled to the framework with only minimal modifications.
  • The approach supports a range of external solvers through its modular interface design.
  • Long-time stability is maintained by the combination with extended-Lagrangian shadow molecular dynamics.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same decomposition strategy might be tested on systems near the metallic boundary to map where the nearsightedness assumption begins to fail.
  • Adaptive overlap tuning could be explored as a route to further error reduction in highly reactive local regions.
  • Coupling the framework to multiple external codes simultaneously could enable mixed-accuracy simulations within a single trajectory.

Load-bearing premise

The nearsightedness of electronic connectivity in non-metallic systems ensures that independent solutions on overlapping subgraphs retain enough accuracy for chemically active systems.

What would settle it

A benchmark on a chemically active system of several thousand atoms in which total energy or atomic forces from the subgraph decomposition differ from a full calculation by more than chemical accuracy.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.03140 by Anders M.N. Niklasson, Cheng-Han Li, Christian F.A. Negre, Joshua Finkelstein, Maksim Kulichenko, Michael E. Wall, Rae A. Corrigan Grove, Sergei Tretiak.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Schematic workflow of the adaptive graph partitioning in SEDACS. a. Starting from the initial atomic coordinates of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Software stack illustrating the primary application, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Overview of the SEDACS framework. User-defined inputs, including the full atomic system and simulation parameters, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. The interface between SEDACS and an external [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (a) Snapshots of the benzene–TCNE complex show [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Total free energy fluctuations (kinetic + potential en [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Errors in the free energy potential (left y-axis) and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Strong-scaling benchmark for a 30,840-atom wa [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Total free energy fluctuation (kinetic + potential [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Weak-scaling benchmark starting with 2,088 water [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Comparison of SCF convergence for a 30,840-atom [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_11.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Graph-based linear-scaling electronic-structure theory provides a scalable framework for parallel quantum-mechanical molecular dynamics (QMD) simulations by exploiting the nearsightedness of the non-local electronic connectivity in non-metallic systems. When combined with recent shadow molecular dynamics in an extended-Lagrangian formulation, it enables stable long-time simulations of large, chemically active systems. This article introduces the Scalable Ecosystem, Driver, and Analyzer for Complex Chemistry Simulations (SEDACS), which integrates all these advances within a modular, Python-based software package for large-scale QMD simulations driven by external electronic-structure codes. SEDACS provides a tunable, adaptive graph construction in which edges encode the non-local electronic overlap between atoms. This graph is then decomposed into a set of smaller, overlapping subgraphs, where the electronic structure of each of these subgraphs is solved for independently and in parallel using an external electronic-structure code. SEDACS can be coupled to a variety of external electronic-structure solvers with minimal modifications to their software, enabling rapid adoption of the graph-based QMD approach. In this way, SEDACS can greatly extend the capability of existing electronic-structure packages by enabling stable QMD simulations of systems that were previously computationally inaccessible. We demonstrate highly efficient and stable QMD simulations for chemically active systems with tens of thousands of atoms by interfacing SEDACS with an external Fortran-based electronic-structure code based on self-consistent-charge density functional tight-binding theory.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces SEDACS, a modular Python-based framework integrating graph-based linear-scaling electronic-structure methods (exploiting nearsightedness of non-local electronic connectivity for decomposition into overlapping subgraphs) with shadow molecular dynamics. It enables coupling to external electronic-structure codes with minimal changes and demonstrates stable, efficient QMD simulations of chemically active systems with tens of thousands of atoms using SCC-DFTB.

Significance. If the accuracy of the subgraph decomposition holds, SEDACS would meaningfully extend existing electronic-structure packages to large-scale QMD simulations of complex systems previously inaccessible due to computational cost. The modular design and emphasis on external-code compatibility are practical strengths that could aid adoption.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and demonstration paragraph: the claim of stable QMD for chemically active systems with tens of thousands of atoms reports only stability and scaling but provides no quantitative error metrics (e.g., ΔE or force RMSE) versus full-system reference calculations on the same systems where both are feasible. This directly bears on whether the graph decomposition preserves sufficient accuracy.
  2. [Abstract] Paragraph on graph construction: the central assumption that nearsightedness of electronic connectivity allows independent subgraph solves to retain accuracy for chemically active non-metallic systems is invoked but not tested with direct comparisons to undecomposed calculations in the regime of the demonstration.
minor comments (1)
  1. The manuscript would benefit from explicit reporting of the overlap sizes, graph-construction parameters, and any convergence tests used in the tens-of-thousands-atom demonstration to support reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and indicate the revisions we will make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and demonstration paragraph: the claim of stable QMD for chemically active systems with tens of thousands of atoms reports only stability and scaling but provides no quantitative error metrics (e.g., ΔE or force RMSE) versus full-system reference calculations on the same systems where both are feasible. This directly bears on whether the graph decomposition preserves sufficient accuracy.

    Authors: We agree that quantitative error metrics are important for validating accuracy. The current manuscript prioritizes demonstrating stability and scaling on systems (tens of thousands of atoms) where full-system references are infeasible. We have performed direct comparisons (energy and force errors) versus undecomposed calculations on smaller systems up to a few thousand atoms where both are feasible, and these show errors remain small. In the revised manuscript we will add these quantitative results (e.g., ΔE and force RMSE tables or plots) to the main text or a dedicated validation section, along with discussion of how they support the large-system claims. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Paragraph on graph construction: the central assumption that nearsightedness of electronic connectivity allows independent subgraph solves to retain accuracy for chemically active non-metallic systems is invoked but not tested with direct comparisons to undecomposed calculations in the regime of the demonstration.

    Authors: We acknowledge that explicit tests of the nearsightedness assumption via direct comparisons strengthen the central claim. The demonstration regime involves systems too large for full calculations, but we have conducted such tests on representative smaller and medium-sized chemically active non-metallic systems. We will incorporate these direct comparison results into the revised manuscript (new subsection or appendix) to explicitly show accuracy retention under the graph decomposition, thereby supporting the method's applicability to the larger demonstration cases. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: software integration framework with no self-referential derivations or fitted predictions.

full rationale

The paper describes SEDACS as a modular Python package that couples graph decomposition (based on the established nearsightedness principle) to external electronic-structure solvers for parallel QMD. No equations, parameters, or physical predictions are derived within the manuscript; the contribution is an integration layer and demonstration of scaling/stability on systems up to tens of thousands of atoms. The nearsightedness assumption is invoked as prior knowledge rather than derived or fitted here, and no self-citation chain is used to justify a uniqueness result or ansatz. The work is therefore self-contained as an engineering framework without any reduction of outputs to inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is a software framework paper; the abstract introduces no fitted parameters, mathematical axioms, or new physical entities.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5817 in / 988 out tokens · 28884 ms · 2026-06-28T08:25:31.849693+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

84 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Car and M

    R. Car and M. Parrinello, Phys. Rev. Lett.55, 2471 (1985)

    1985

  2. [2]

    Allen and D

    M. Allen and D. Tildesley,Computer Simulation of Liq- uids(Oxford Science, London, 1990)

    1990

  3. [3]

    Carloni, U

    P. Carloni, U. Rothlisberger, and M. Parrinello, Acc. Chem. Res.35, 455 (2002)

    2002

  4. [4]

    J. S. Tse, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem.53, 249 (2002)

    2002

  5. [5]

    A. F. Voter and F. M. ad T. C. Germann, Annu. Rev. Mater. Res.32, 321 (2002)

    2002

  6. [6]

    Iftimie, P

    R. Iftimie, P. Minary, and M. E. Tuckerman, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.102, 6654 (2005), https://www.pnas.org/doi/pdf/10.1073/pnas.0500193102

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.0500193102 2005

  7. [7]

    Marx and J

    D. Marx and J. Hutter,Ab Initio Molecular Dynamics: Basic Theory and Advanced Methods(Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2009)

    2009

  8. [8]

    M. E. Tuckerman,Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Molecular Simulation(Oxford University Press, New York, 2010)

    2010

  9. [9]

    Karplus, Angew

    M. Karplus, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed.53, 9992 (2014)

    2014

  10. [10]

    W. Jia, H. Wang, M. Chen, D. Lu, L. Lin, R. Car, E. Weinan, and L. Zhang, inSC20: International Con- ference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis(2020) pp. 1–14

    2020

  11. [11]

    Fedik, R

    N. Fedik, R. Zubatyuk, M. Kulichenko, N. Lubbers, J. S. Smith, B. Nebgen, R. Messerly, Y. W. Li, A. I. Boldyrev, K. Barros, O. Isayev, and S. Tretiak, Nat. Rev. Chem. 6, 653 (2022)

    2022

  12. [12]

    Zhang, V

    Y.-W. Zhang, V. Sorkin, Z. H. Aitken, A. Politano, J. Behler, A. P Thompson, T. W. Ko, S. P. Ong, O. Cha- lykh, D. Korogod, E. Podryabinkin, A. Shapeev, J. Li, Y. Mishin, Z. Pei, X. Liu, J. Kim, Y. Park, S. Hwang, S. Han, K. Sheriff, Y. Cao, and R. Freitas, Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng.33, 023301 (2025). 14

    2025

  13. [13]

    Kulichenko, B

    M. Kulichenko, B. Nebgen, N. Lubbers, J. S. Smith, K. Barros, A. E. A. Allen, A. Habib, E. Shinkle, N. Fedik, Y. W. Li, R. A. Messerly, and S. Tre- tiak, Chem. Rev.124, 13681 (2024), pMID: 39572011, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.4c00572

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.4c00572 2024

  14. [14]

    Ouyang, X

    Y. Ouyang, X. Chen, Y. Liu, X. Chen, H. Shang, Z. Chen, R. Lin, X. Gao, L. Wang, F. Li, J. Shan, H. Song, H. Cui, X. Feng, and J. Xue, inProceedings of the Inter- national Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis, SC ’25 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2025) p. 1631–1645

    2025

  15. [15]

    Kalita, H

    B. Kalita, H. Gokcan, and O. Isayev, Nat. Comput. Sci. 5, 1120 (2025)

    2025

  16. [16]

    Hohenberg and W

    P. Hohenberg and W. Kohn, Phys. Rev.136, B:864 (1964)

    1964

  17. [17]

    Kohn and L

    W. Kohn and L. J. Sham, Phys. Rev.140, 1133 (1965)

    1965

  18. [18]

    R. G. Parr and W. Yang,Density-functional theory of atoms and molecules(Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1989)

    1989

  19. [19]

    Dreizler and K

    R. Dreizler and K. Gross,Density-functional theory (Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 1990)

    1990

  20. [20]

    Goedecker, Rev

    S. Goedecker, Rev. Mod. Phys.71, 1085 (1999)

    1999

  21. [21]

    D. R. Bowler and T. Miyazaki, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 22, 074207 (2010)

    2010

  22. [22]

    D. R. Bowler and T. Miyazaki, Rep. Prog. Phys.75, 036503 (2012)

    2012

  23. [23]

    S. Mohr, L. E. Ratcliff, L. Genovese, D. Caliste, P. Boulanger, S. Goedecker, and T. Deutsch, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.17, 31360 (2015)

    2015

  24. [24]

    Fattebert, D

    J.-L. Fattebert, D. Osei-Kuffuor, E. W. Draeger, T. Og- itsu, and W. D. Krauss, inSC ’16: Proceedings of the International Conference for High Performance Comput- ing, Networking, Storage and Analysis(2016) pp. 12–22

    2016

  25. [25]

    Elstner, D

    M. Elstner, D. Poresag, G. Jungnickel, J. Elsner, M. Haugk, T. Frauenheim, S. Suhai, and G. Seifert, Phys. Rev. B58, 7260 (1998)

    1998

  26. [26]

    M. W. Finnis, A. T. Paxton, M. Methfessel, and M. van Schilfgarde, Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 5149 (1998)

    1998

  27. [27]

    Frauenheim, G

    T. Frauenheim, G. Seifert, M. Elstner, Z. Hajnal, G. Jungnickel, D. Poresag, S. Suhai, and R. Scholz, Phys. Stat. sol.217, 41 (2000)

    2000

  28. [28]

    Hourahine, B

    B. Hourahine, B. Aradi, V. Blum, F. Bonaf´ e, A. Buc- cheri, C. Camacho, C. Cevallos, M. Y. Deshaye, T. Du- mitric˘ a, A. Dominguez, S. Ehlert, M. Elstner, T. van der Heide, J. Hermann, S. Irle, J. J. Kranz, C. K¨ ohler, T. Kowalczyk, T. Kubaˇ r, I. S. Lee, V. Lutsker, R. J. Maurer, S. K. Min, I. Mitchell, C. Negre, T. A. Niehaus, A. M. N. Niklasson, A. J...

    2020

  29. [29]

    A. M. N. Niklasson, S. M. Mnizsewski, C. F. A. Negre, M. J. Cawkwell, P. J. Swart, J. Mohd-Yusof, T. C. Ger- mann, M. E. Wall, N. Bock, E. H. Rubensson, and H. N. Djidjev, J. Chem. Phys.144, 234101 (2016)

    2016

  30. [30]

    C. F. A. Negre, M. E. Wall, and A. M. N. Niklasson, J. Chem. Phys.158, 074108 (2023)

    2023

  31. [31]

    Graph parti- tioning methods for fast parallel quantum molecular dy- namics,

    H. N. Djidjev, G. Hahn, S. M. Mniszewski, C. F. Negre, A. M. Niklasson, and V. B. Sardeshmukh, “Graph parti- tioning methods for fast parallel quantum molecular dy- namics,” in2016 Proceedings of the Seventh SIAM Work- shop on Combinatorial Scientific Computing, pp. 42–51, http781611974690.ch5

  32. [32]

    M. Lass, S. Mohr, H. Wiebeler, T. K¨ uhne, and C. Plessl, inProceedings of the Platform for Advanced Scientific Computing (PASC) Conference(ACM, 2018)

    2018

  33. [33]

    H. N. Djidjev, G. Hahn, S. M. Mniszewski, C. F. A. Negre, and A. M. N. Niklasson, Algorithms12(2019), 10.3390/a12090187

    work page doi:10.3390/a12090187 2019

  34. [34]

    M. Lass, R. Schade, T. K¨ uhne, and C. Plessl, inPro- ceedings of the International Conference for High Per- formance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis (SC)(IEEE Computer Society, 2020) p. 1127

    2020

  35. [35]

    Kulichenko, R

    M. Kulichenko, R. M. Stanton, C.-H. Li, N. Lubbers, S. Tretiak, M. E. Wall, C. F. Negre, J. Finkelstein, and A. M. Niklasson, Journal of Chemical Theory and Com- putation21, 10780 (2025)

    2025

  36. [36]

    W. T. Yang, Phys. Rev. Lett.66, 1438 (1991)

    1991

  37. [37]

    W. T. Yang and T. S. Lee, J. Chem. Phys.103, 5674 (1995)

    1995

  38. [38]

    Kitaura, E

    K. Kitaura, E. Ikeo, T. Asada, T. Nakano, and M. Ue- bayasi, Chemical Physics Letters313, 701 (1999)

    1999

  39. [39]

    Ozaki, Phys

    T. Ozaki, Phys. Rev. B74, 245101 (2006)

    2006

  40. [40]

    V. Q. Vuong, Y. Nishimoto, D. G. Fedorov, B. G. Sumpter, T. A. Niehaus, and S. Irle, Journal of Chem- ical Theory and Computation15, 3008 (2019), pMID: 30998360, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.9b00108

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.9b00108 2019

  41. [41]

    The fmo-dftb method,

    Y. Nishimoto and S. Irle, “The fmo-dftb method,” inRecent Advances of the Fragment Molecular Orbital Method: Enhanced Performance and Applicability, edited by Y. Mochizuki, S. Tanaka, and K. Fukuzawa (Springer Singapore, Singapore, 2021) pp. 459–485

    2021

  42. [42]

    A. H. R. Palser and D. E. Manolopoulos, Phys. Rev. B 58, 12704 (1998)

    1998

  43. [43]

    A. M. N. Niklasson, Phys. Rev. B66, 155115 (2002)

    2002

  44. [44]

    E. H. Rubensson and A. M. N. Niklasson, SIAM J. Sci. Comput.36, 148 (2014)

    2014

  45. [45]

    L. A. Truflandier, R. M. Dianzinga, and D. R. Bowler, J. Chem. Phys.144(2016), 10.1063/1.4943213

    work page doi:10.1063/1.4943213 2016

  46. [46]

    Borstnik, J

    U. Borstnik, J. VandeVondele, V. Weber, and J. Hutter, Parallel Comput.40, 47 (2014)

    2014

  47. [47]

    Weber, T

    V. Weber, T. Latino, A. Pozdeev, I. Feduova, and A. Cu- rioni, J. Chem. Theory Comput.11, 3145 (2015)

    2015

  48. [48]

    and Neese, Frank , year = 2015, month = jul, journal =

    P. Pinski, C. Riplinger, E. F. Valeev, and F. Neese, The Journal of Chemical Physics143, 034108 (2015), https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4926879

    work page doi:10.1063/1.4926879 2015

  49. [49]

    Kruchinina, E

    A. Kruchinina, E. Rudberg, and E. H. Rubens- son, Journal of Chemical Theory and Com- putation12, 5788 (2016), pMID: 27783507, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.6b00626

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.6b00626 2016

  50. [50]

    Finkelstein, J

    J. Finkelstein, J. S. Smith, S. M. Mniszewski, K. Bar- ros, C. F. A. Negre, E. H. Rubensson, and A. M. N. Niklasson, Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation17, 2256 (2021), pMID: 33797253, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00057

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00057 2021

  51. [51]

    A. M. N. Niklasson, Phys. Rev. Lett.100, 123004 (2008)

    2008

  52. [52]

    Hirakawa, T

    T. Hirakawa, T. suzuki, D. R. Bowler, and T. Myazaki, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter29, 405901 (2017)

    2017

  53. [53]

    A. M. N. Niklasson, Eur. Phys. J. B94, 164 (2021)

    2021

  54. [54]

    A. M. N. Niklasson and C. F. A. Negre, The Journal of Chemical Physics158, 154105 (2023)

    2023

  55. [55]

    M. J. Cawkwell and et al., “LATTE,” (2010), Los Alamos National Laboratory (LA- CC-10004), http://www.github.com/lanl/latte

    2010

  56. [56]

    N. Bock, M. J. Cawkwell, J. D. Coe, A. Krishnapriyan, M. P. Kroonblawd, A. Lang, C. Liu, E. M. Saez, S. M. Mniszewski, C. F. A. Negre, A. M. N. Niklas- 15 son, E. Sanville, M. A. Wood, and P. Yang, “LATTE,” (2008)

    2008

  57. [57]

    Perriot, C

    R. Perriot, C. F. A. Negre, S. D. McGrane, and M. J. Cawkwell, AIP Conf. Proc.1979, 050014 (2018)

    1979

  58. [58]

    Finkelstein, E

    J. Finkelstein, E. H. Rubensson, S. M. Mniszewski, C. F. A. Negre, and A. M. N. Niklas- son, Journal of Chemical Theory and Com- putation18, 4255 (2022), pMID: 35670603, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.2c00274

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.2c00274 2022

  59. [59]

    Karypis, , and V

    G. Karypis, , and V. Kumar, SIAM J. Sci. Comput.20, 359 (1999)

    1999

  60. [60]

    D. K. Remler and P. A. Madden, Mol. Phys.70, 921 (1990)

    1990

  61. [61]

    Pulay and G

    P. Pulay and G. Fogarasi, Chem. Phys. Lett.386, 272 (2004)

    2004

  62. [62]

    A. M. N. Niklasson, C. J. Tymczak, and M. Challa- combe, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 123001 (2006)

    2006

  63. [63]

    A. M. N. Niklasson, J. Chem. Phys.147, 054103 (2017)

    2017

  64. [64]

    A. M. N. Niklasson, J. Chem. Phys.152, 104103 (2020)

    2020

  65. [65]

    A. M. N. Niklasson, J. Chem. Theory Comput.16, 3628 (2020)

    2020

  66. [66]

    Steneteg, I

    P. Steneteg, I. A. Abrikosov, V. Weber, and A. M. N. Niklasson, Phys. Rev. B82, 075110 (2010)

    2010

  67. [67]

    A. M. N. Niklasson, P. Steneteg, A. Odell, N. Bock, M. Challacombe, C. J. Tymczak, E. Holmstrom, G. Zheng, and V. Weber, J. Chem. Phys.130, 214109 (2009)

    2009

  68. [68]

    Zheng, A

    G. Zheng, A. M. N. Niklasson, and M. Karplus, J. Chem. Phys.135, 044122 (2011)

    2011

  69. [69]

    Pulay, Chem

    P. Pulay, Chem. Phys. Let.73, 393 (1980)

    1980

  70. [70]

    Pulay, J

    P. Pulay, J. Comput. Chem.3, 556 (1982)

    1982

  71. [71]

    Habib, J

    A. Habib, J. Finkelstein, and A. M. Niklasson, Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation20, 7102 (2024)

    2024

  72. [72]

    Gpu-accelerated charge- equilibration for shadow molecular dynamics in python,

    M. C. Kaymak, N. Lubbers, C. F. A. Negre, M. Wall, and A. M. N. Niklasson, “Gpu-accelerated charge- equilibration for shadow molecular dynamics in python,” (2025), arXiv:2503.21176 [physics.comp-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  73. [73]

    Woi´ nska, S

    M. Woi´ nska, S. Grabowsky, P. M. Dominiak, K. Wo´ zniak, and D. Jayatilaka, Sci. Adv.2, e1600192 (2016)

    2016

  74. [74]

    Strachan, A

    A. Strachan, A. C. T. van Duin, D. Chakraborty, S. Das- gupta, and W. A. Goddard, Phys. Rev. Lett.91, 098301 (2003)

    2003

  75. [75]

    J. Wu, J. Wu, J. Li, Y. Shang, and L. Chen, ACS Omega8, 18851 (2023), https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.3c01160

    work page doi:10.1021/acsomega.3c01160 2023

  76. [76]

    A. M. N. Niklasson, M. J. Cawkwell, E. H. Rubensson, and E. Rudberg, Phys. Rev. E92, 063301 (2015)

    2015

  77. [77]

    Nishimoto, J

    Y. Nishimoto, J. Chem. Phys.146, 084101 (2017)

    2017

  78. [78]

    Porezag, T

    D. Porezag, T. Frauenheim, T. K¨ ohler, G. Seifert, and R. Kaschner, Phys. Rev. B51, 12947 (1995)

    1995

  79. [79]

    Seifert, D

    G. Seifert, D. Porezag, and T. Frauenheim, International Journal of Quantum Chemistry58, 185 (1996)

    1996

  80. [80]

    M. Gaus, Q. Cui, and M. Elstner, J, Chem. Theory Comput.7, 931 (2011)

    2011

Showing first 80 references.