Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 5 minor 96 references

A small displacement of the point dipole from the center of a spherical molecule—the shifted Stockmayer fluid—creates a spontaneous interfacial electric field in a polar liquid, and the field's sign reverses as the dipole moment increases.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

In the shifted Stockmayer fluid, an off-center dipole creates interfacial polarization and an electric field whose direction reverses as dipole strength increases.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-05 challenge →

load-bearing objection The sign inversion in interfacial polarization looks real but needs a slab-correction check and real error bars before I'd trust the weak-field end. the 1 major comments →

arxiv 2509.05523 v1 pith:BHKRHVMP submitted 2025-09-05 cond-mat.soft cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.stat-mech

Stockmayer Fluid with a Shifted Dipole: Interfacial Behavior

Samuel Varner , Pierre J. Walker , Ananya Venkatachalam , Bilin Zhuang , Zhen-Gang Wang This is my paper
classification cond-mat.soft cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.stat-mech
keywords shifted Stockmayer fluidliquid-vapor interfaceinterfacial polarizationelectric field sign inversionimage-dipole modelmolecular dynamicssurface potentialdipolar fluids
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The reading

The paper asks whether a small geometric offset of a point dipole from its molecule's center—present in nearly all real polar molecules—can generate a spontaneous electric field at a liquid-vapor interface. Using molecular dynamics simulations of the shifted Stockmayer fluid, it shows that the offset creates persistent polar ordering at the interface, a nonzero interfacial electric field, and a potential difference between liquid and vapor. Unexpectedly, the field's sign flips as the dipole moment grows, so the field can point either away from or into the liquid depending on molecular parameters. The paper explains the angular ordering with a simple image-dipole picture extended to shifted dipoles, and finds that the picture reproduces the simulations' angular distributions qualitatively. If correct, the work identifies molecular asymmetry as a tunable, generic source of interfacial electric fields in polar liquids.

Core claim

The central claim is that in a fluid of Lennard-Jones spheres carrying a point dipole displaced a distance d from the particle center, the liquid-vapor interface spontaneously develops polar order, an electric field, and a potential difference, all of which are exactly zero for the symmetric Stockmayer fluid. The shift skews the image-dipole interaction energy so that molecules on both sides of the interface preferentially point toward the liquid. For a fixed d, the interfacial electric field changes sign as the dipole moment increases: at weak dipoles the field points against the density gradient, at strong dipoles it points with it, and at intermediate parameters the field is S-shaped with

What carries the argument

The shifted Stockmayer fluid: a rigid Lennard-Jones sphere with a point dipole displaced by d from the sphere center, the simplest way to break the spherical symmetry of the standard Stockmayer model. The argument is carried by an image-dipole construction: molecules near a dielectric discontinuity interact with an image dipole on the opposite side of the interface, and shifting the dipole changes the molecule-image distance from z to z + d cos θ, skewing the angular energy landscape and biasing dipoles toward the liquid. This modified energy, combined with the polarization computed from Gauss's law, yields the interfacial electric field and potential.

Load-bearing premise

The dipole-dipole interactions are computed in a box that is periodic in all three dimensions, with the liquid slab repeated along the long axis; if the long-range solver does not remove the forces from these periodic images, the artificial interactions could bias molecular orientation and could create or flip the small interfacial field.

What would settle it

Repeat the same simulations with a 2D slab-corrected electrostatic solver that removes forces from periodic images along the interface normal, and compare the sign of the interfacial electric field and potential difference. If the sign inversion disappears or the profiles change qualitatively at fixed dipole moment and shift, the reported inversion is a periodic-image artifact rather than a property of the shifted Stockmayer fluid.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The symmetric Stockmayer fluid's interface has zero polar order, zero electric field, and zero potential difference; the shifted model shows that a small geometric asymmetry alone is sufficient to create all three.
  • For a fixed dipole shift, increasing the dipole moment reverses the sign of the interfacial electric field and of the potential difference across the interface, so the same liquid can present either sign of surface potential depending on state conditions.
  • At parameters mapping roughly to water, the model produces an interfacial field of about 16 MV/cm, matching the order of magnitude measured experimentally, suggesting asymmetry-driven polarization can match that of hydrogen-bonded water.
  • Molecules in the vapor phase just outside the interface adopt a perpendicular orientation at strong dipole moments, agreeing with density-functional predictions that earlier simulations had not resolved.
  • The dipole shift sets the magnitude of the interfacial field while the dipole strength sets its shape, giving a two-parameter handle for tuning interfacial electrostatics.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Because the sign of the interfacial field depends on the product of dipole moment and shift, molecules with identical charge magnitude but different charge-center locations could have opposite surface potentials; this is a testable prediction for real solvents using surface potential or surface-specific spectroscopy.
  • The same image-dipole logic implies that the sign inversion should persist in more complex models as long as the dipole is offset toward the same side of the molecule; a natural extension is to check whether the inversion survives in atomistic water models with flexible geometry.
  • If the slab-periodic electrostatic solver introduces spurious image forces from the repeated slabs, the weak fields near the inversion point could be an artifact; that concern is testable by comparing slab-corrected and uncorrected long-range solvers on the same system.
  • The mechanism suggests a design principle for interfacial electrostatics: tuning the geometric offset of a polar group, not just its charge magnitude, could control whether an interface attracts cations or anions.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

1 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the liquid–vapor interface of the shifted Stockmayer (sSF) fluid by molecular dynamics simulations with a Lennard-Jones sphere and an off-center point dipole. The authors compute density, nematic and polar order, angular distributions, polarization, electric field, and electrostatic potential profiles for a range of dipole moments μ and shifts d. They report that a dipole shift induces interfacial polarization and a spontaneous electric field, and that the sign of this field, and hence the sign of the potential difference across the interface, inverts with increasing μ. They interpret the angular distributions with an image-dipole model, extending the symmetric Stockmayer expression by replacing z with z + d cos θ. The manuscript's central empirical claim is the sign inversion of the interfacial electric field and potential with increasing dipole moment.

Significance. If the results are correct, the paper establishes a remarkably simple mechanism: a small geometric offset of a dipole from a molecular center can generate a tunable interfacial electric field in a generic polar fluid, with the field direction controlled by the dipole moment. This is of substantial interest for understanding interfacial electrostatics, catalysis at interfaces, and ion adsorption. The strengths of the paper include the systematic parameter sweep, the use of instantaneous Willard–Chandler interfaces, the block-averaged statistical check for P2 in Fig. 5, and the use of open-source analysis software. The claim that the sSF model at μ=2, d=0.25 yields an interfacial field of ~16 MV/cm, similar in sign and magnitude to estimates for water, is a falsifiable prediction and is appropriately qualified. However, the central sign-inversion claim currently rests on simulation details that are not fully documented, and on weak-field data without reported statistical uncertainty.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section III.C, text after Fig. 8] The physical explanation for the sign inversion is presented without direct support. The paragraph beginning 'Although we do not yet have a definitive physical explanation...' offers two qualitative mechanisms (dense-region averaging versus low-density orientation) but does not connect them quantitatively to the sign change. Since this sign inversion is the central claim, the explanation should be tied to the angular distributions of Fig. 7 or to a decomposition of the polarization into liquid-side and vapor-side contributions. A specific diagnostic would be to compute separately the contributions to P_z(z) from particles whose LJ centers are on the liquid side versus the vapor side; this would show whether the sign change is caused by the vapor side, the liquid side, or their competition.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Section III.C] Typos: 'asymmmetry' and 'effects' (verb form) in the abstract; 'fluourescence' in the Introduction. These should be corrected.
  2. [Section II.A] The cutoff for the PPPM real-space part is given as 'typically between 8–10 σ', but the box cross-section is 10σ in x and y. Please clarify how the real-space cutoff relates to the box dimensions, and whether the PPPM mesh spacing and convergence parameters were adjusted for each state point.
  3. [Section III.A, Fig. 2(c)] The non-monotonic density behavior for μ > 1.8 is attributed to a ferroelectric transition 'reported for dipolar hard spheres'. Since the present model includes Lennard-Jones attraction and the shift, a direct order-parameter check (e.g., a global polarization order parameter) would strengthen this attribution. At minimum, cite the specific Stockmayer ferroelectric transition results if they exist.
  4. [Section III.C, Eqs. (8)–(10)] Equation (8) is written in SI units, but the paper uses reduced units in all figures. The relation between the reduced electric field E* and the dimensionless polarization should be stated explicitly (the SI appendix gives units, but the conversion factor in the main text is missing).
  5. [Fig. 9] The figure shows Δψ* for d ≥ 0.05 only. The text says d=0 gives zero potential difference, but no d=0 point is plotted. Please either include d=0 or state explicitly that it is excluded because the field is zero by symmetry.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged

The image-dipole 'agreement' is supported by fitting the simulation's own μ and d parameters, making the theory-validation partly circular; the central sign-inversion result itself is an independent MD observation.

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Section III.B, paragraph discussing Fig. 7(c,d) and the angular distribution fits]
    "Figures 7c and 7d show remarkable qualitative agreement between the MD simulations and the theoretical predictions. The lines were computed through a fitting procedure where the parameters of the distribution (i.e., ε, µ, d, z, etc.) were varied to minimize residuals."

    The 'theoretical predictions' from Eq. (6) are curves fit to the MD angular distributions, with μ and d—the very parameters fixed as simulation inputs—varied along with ε and z to minimize residuals. Agreement obtained after such a fit is not an independent test of the image-dipole construction: the theory is optimized against the same data it is then said to predict. Calling this 'remarkable agreement' and using it as evidence that the image-dipole construction explains the simulation results is circular, because the comparison is constructed to match. The central E_z/Δψ sign inversion is not derived from these fits, but the explanatory claim in the abstract is weakened by this fitted-input validation.

  2. self definitional [Section III.B, definition of liquid/vapor regions for the angular-distribution comparison]
    "we choose to define the transition from liquid to vapor at z ≈ 2σ based on the location where P2(z) crosses from negative to positive in Figures 3, 5, and 6. We do this to remain in line with the predictions of the image-dipole method which predicts that P2 is negative in the liquid and positive in the vapor."

    The MD data are divided into 'liquid' and 'vapor' sides using exactly the P2 sign-change that the image-dipole theory is supposed to predict. The paper states this split is chosen 'to remain in line with' the theory. Consequently, the qualitative agreement in Fig. 7(c,d) is partly self-consistent by construction: the comparison regions are defined using the theory's predicted sign of P2, so the theory's prediction about P2 in each region is not independently tested. This compounds the fitted-parameter circularity, though the full angular-distribution shapes are not entirely fixed by the split.

full rationale

The paper's headline result—the sign inversion of interfacial polarization and electric field with increasing dipole moment—is a direct simulation observable computed from Eq. (9) and Gauss's law Eq. (8), not an output of the image-dipole theory. That central claim therefore has independent content and is not circular. The circularity lies in the explanatory claim that the image-dipole construction is validated by 'remarkable agreement' with simulation: the theoretical curves in Fig. 7 are fits that vary ε, μ, d, and z, with μ and d already fixed simulation inputs, so the agreement is partly a fit, not a prediction. A further, secondary circularity is that the liquid/vapor split for this comparison is chosen using the P2 sign change predicted by the theory. These issues warrant a score of 6 (partial circularity), not higher, because the sign-inversion result itself does not reduce to the fitted theory, and the paper openly discloses the fitting procedure. The possible missing slab correction for the periodic z-dimension is a correctness risk for the small simulated fields, but it is not a circular-reasoning step and therefore does not contribute to the circularity score.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 3 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central empirical result (a sign-reversing interfacial field for off-center dipoles) rests on the molecular dynamics method and the assumption that the PPPM solver correctly handles the slab geometry. The image-dipole interpretation rests on the fitted parameters εα, εβ, z, µ, d and on a post hoc choice of the liquid-vapor dividing surface. The theoretical comparison is thus more illustrative than testable, and the simulation data should be re-examined with explicit slab-correction settings and error bars before the sign inversion is accepted as robust.

free parameters (4)
  • Dielectric constants εα, εβ in image-dipole energy = not reported
    Parameters in Eq (5)/(6); varied to minimize residuals in fits to the MD angular distributions (Fig 7c,d).
  • Distance z from interface used in image-dipole energy = not reported
    The fitting procedure explicitly lists z as a varied parameter; a single effective distance is assigned to the liquid and vapor regions.
  • Dipole moment magnitude µ = not reported (simulation fixed values 1.0-2.0)
    The paper states µ was varied in the fit even though it is a fixed simulation input; including it in the fit makes the comparison non-independent.
  • Dipole shift d = not reported (simulation fixed values 0.0-0.25)
    Same as µ; d is a simulation input but is listed among the parameters varied to minimize residuals.
axioms (3)
  • domain assumption The liquid-vapor interface can be treated as a sharp dielectric discontinuity between two homogeneous phases with well-defined dielectric constants, ignoring the diffuse density profile and dipole correlations.
    This is the basis of the image-dipole energy in Eq (5) and its shifted version Eq (6), used throughout Section III.B. The authors later acknowledge that 'significant dipole correlation effects are completely ignored'.
  • domain assumption Molecules near the interface are independent and each interacts only with its own image dipole, so the angular distribution follows a Boltzmann weight exp(-βU(z,θ)).
    The theoretical curves in Fig 7 are obtained from this single-particle picture; it neglects interactions between interfacial molecules that are present in the MD simulations.
  • ad hoc to paper The interface position for splitting liquid and vapor angular distributions is set at z ≈ 2σ.
    The authors select this boundary based on the zero crossing of P2(z) and state they do so 'to remain in line with the predictions of the image-dipole method' (Section III.B), so the boundary is chosen post hoc, not derived from the data.

reviewed 2026-08-05 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Stockmayer Fluid with a Shifted Dipole: Interfacial Behavior." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BHKRHVMP

@misc{pith2026250905523,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Stockmayer Fluid with a Shifted Dipole: Interfacial Behavior},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BHKRHVMP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.05523}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

We investigate the properties of the liquid-vapor interface in the shifted Stockmayer fluid using molecular dynamics simulations in the canonical ensemble. We study the role of the dipole moment strength and the degree of asymmmetry on equilibrium interfacial characteristics, including density profiles, polar order, nematic order, interfacial polarization, electric field, and electrostatic potential. In addition, we compute angular distribution functions across the interface to gain insight into how the dipole shift affects the molecular orientation. We find that the shift significantly effects angular distribution functions by altering the polar order while leaving the nematic order relatively unaffected, in comparison to the reference symmetric Stockmayer fluid. We find that these results are consistently explained using an image-dipole construction that has been previously applied to symmetric Stockmayer fluids but has never been extended to the shifted model. We find remarkable agreement between the simple theory and the simulations in the qualitative shape of the distribution functions for both the liquid and vapor phases in proximity to the interface. Unexpectedly, the spontaneous polarization at the interface, and therefore the generated electric field, changes sign as the dipole moment strength increases. This also leads to an inversion of the sign of the potential difference across the interface.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.05523 by Ananya Venkatachalam, Bilin Zhuang, Pierre J. Walker, Samuel Varner, Zhen-Gang Wang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Snapshot of liquid–vapor equilibrium simulation using the sSF model. Blue spheres represent the Lennard–Jones particles and yellow [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Interfacial density profiles for various [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Nematic order profiles with interface surface normal as ref [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Image dipole construction at a liquid–vapor interface of the (a) Stockmayer fluid and (b) shifted Stockmayer fluid. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Nematic order profile (solid lines) from extended simulations [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Spatially varying nematic ((a) and (b)) and polar ((c) and (d)) order parameters with respect to surface normal vector. (a)+(c) Profiles [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Angular distribution functions in the interfacial region for various dipole moments [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Spatially varying electric field ((a) and (b)) and electrostatic potential ((c) and (d)). (a)+(c) Profiles for a shift of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. The potential difference between the bulk regions of vapor [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png] view at source ↗

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

96 extracted references · 77 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    z |B r_p O

    A. P. Willard and D. Chandler, J. Phys. Chem. B, 2010, 114, 1954--1958 mcitethebibliography esi.tex0000664000000000000000000001050015056660207011063 0ustar rootroot [aip,jcp] revtex4-1 [ colorlinks=true, urlcolor=blue, linkcolor=blue, citecolor=black ] hyperref graphicx dcolumn bm [utf8] inputenc [T1] fontenc mathptmx etoolbox amsmath [1] 2009 \, 2032 ' r...

    arXiv 2010

  2. [2]

    Yan , author R

    author author X. Yan , author R. M. \ Bain , \ and\ author R. G. \ Cooks ,\ 10.1002/anie.201602270 journal journal Angewandte Chemie International Edition \ volume 55 ,\ pages 12960 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1002/anie.201602270 2016

  3. [3]

    Wei , author Y

    author author Z. Wei , author Y. Li , author R. G. \ Cooks , \ and\ author X. Yan ,\ 10.1146/annurev-physchem-121319-110654 journal journal Annual Review of Physical Chemistry \ volume 71 ,\ pages 31 ( year 2020 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-physchem-121319-110654 2020

  4. [4]

    Narayan , author J

    author author S. Narayan , author J. Muldoon , author M. G. \ Finn , author V. V. \ Fokin , author H. C. \ Kolb , \ and\ author K. B. \ Sharpless ,\ 10.1002/anie.200462883 journal journal Angewandte Chemie International Edition \ volume 44 ,\ pages 3275 ( year 2005 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1002/anie.200462883 2005

  5. [5]

    Serrano-Luginbühl , author K

    author author S. Serrano-Luginbühl , author K. Ruiz-Mirazo , author R. Ostaszewski , author F. Gallou , \ and\ author P. Walde ,\ 10.1038/s41570-018-0042-6 journal journal Nat Rev Chem \ volume 2 ,\ pages 306 ( year 2018 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1038/s41570-018-0042-6 2018

  6. [6]

    author author C. J. C. \ Jordan , author E. A. \ Lowe , \ and\ author J. R. R. \ Verlet ,\ 10.1021/jacs.2c04935 journal journal J. Am. Chem. Soc. \ volume 144 ,\ pages 14012 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1021/jacs.2c04935 2022

  7. [7]

    Chen , author R

    author author H. Chen , author R. Wang , author J. Xu , author X. Yuan , author D. Zhang , author Z. Zhu , author M. Marshall , author K. Bowen , \ and\ author X. Zhang ,\ 10.1021/jacs.2c12731 journal journal J. Am. Chem. Soc. \ volume 145 ,\ pages 2647 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1021/jacs.2c12731 2023

  8. [8]

    Liu \ and\ author J

    author author T. Liu \ and\ author J. P. D. \ Abbatt ,\ 10.1038/s41557-021-00777-0 journal journal Nat. Chem. \ volume 13 ,\ pages 1173 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1038/s41557-021-00777-0 2021

  9. [9]

    Wan , author Y

    author author Z. Wan , author Y. Fang , author Z. Liu , author J. S. \ Francisco , \ and\ author C. Zhu ,\ 10.1021/jacs.2c09837 journal journal J. Am. Chem. Soc. \ volume 145 ,\ pages 944 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1021/jacs.2c09837 2023

  10. [10]

    Rossignol , author L

    author author S. Rossignol , author L. Tinel , author A. Bianco , author M. Passananti , author M. Brigante , author D. J. \ Donaldson , \ and\ author C. George ,\ 10.1126/science.aaf3617 journal journal Science \ volume 353 ,\ pages 699 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aaf3617 2016

  11. [11]

    Xia , author J

    author author D. Xia , author J. Chen , author H.-B. \ Xie , author J. Zhong , \ and\ author J. S. \ Francisco ,\ 10.1021/jacs.2c13661 journal journal J. Am. Chem. Soc. \ volume 145 ,\ pages 4791 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1021/jacs.2c13661 2023

  12. [12]

    Liang , author C

    author author Q. Liang , author C. Zhu , \ and\ author J. Yang ,\ 10.1021/jacs.3c00734 journal journal J. Am. Chem. Soc. \ volume 145 ,\ pages 10159 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1021/jacs.3c00734 2023

  13. [13]

    George , author M

    author author C. George , author M. Ammann , author B. D’Anna , author D. J. \ Donaldson , \ and\ author S. A. \ Nizkorodov ,\ 10.1021/cr500648z journal journal Chem. Rev. \ volume 115 ,\ pages 4218 ( year 2015 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1021/cr500648z 2015

  14. [14]

    author author M. F. \ Ruiz-Lopez , author J. S. \ Francisco , author M. T. C. \ Martins-Costa , \ and\ author J. M. \ Anglada ,\ 10.1038/s41570-020-0203-2 journal journal Nat Rev Chem \ volume 4 ,\ pages 459 ( year 2020 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1038/s41570-020-0203-2 2020

  15. [15]

    Yan , author R

    author author X. Yan , author R. Augusti , author X. Li , \ and\ author R. G. \ Cooks ,\ 10.1002/cplu.201300172 journal journal ChemPlusChem \ volume 78 ,\ pages 1142 ( year 2013 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1002/cplu.201300172 2013

  16. [16]

    Girod , author E

    author author M. Girod , author E. Moyano , author D. I. \ Campbell , \ and\ author R. G. \ Cooks ,\ 10.1039/C0SC00416B journal journal Chem. Sci. \ volume 2 ,\ pages 501 ( year 2011 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1039/c0sc00416b 2011

  17. [17]

    author author L. R. \ Pestana , author H. Hao , \ and\ author T. Head-Gordon ,\ 10.1021/acs.nanolett.9b04369 journal journal Nano Lett. \ volume 20 ,\ pages 606 ( year 2020 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.9b04369 2020

  18. [18]

    author author D. V. \ Matyushov ,\ 10.1063/1.5124390 journal journal Biomicrofluidics \ volume 13 ,\ pages 064106 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1063/1.5124390 2019

  19. [19]

    Muñoz-Santiburcio \ and\ author D

    author author D. Muñoz-Santiburcio \ and\ author D. Marx ,\ 10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c01292 journal journal Chem. Rev. \ volume 121 ,\ pages 6293 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c01292 2021

  20. [20]

    author author V. V. \ Welborn , author L. Ruiz Pestana , \ and\ author T. Head-Gordon ,\ 10.1038/s41929-018-0109-2 journal journal Nat Catal \ volume 1 ,\ pages 649 ( year 2018 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1038/s41929-018-0109-2 2018

  21. [21]

    Ashton , author A

    author author M. Ashton , author A. Mishra , author J. Neugebauer , \ and\ author C. Freysoldt ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.176801 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 124 ,\ pages 176801 ( year 2020 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.124.176801 2020

  22. [22]

    Shaik , author D

    author author S. Shaik , author D. Danovich , author J. Joy , author Z. Wang , \ and\ author T. Stuyver ,\ 10.1021/jacs.0c05128 journal journal J. Am. Chem. Soc. \ volume 142 ,\ pages 12551 ( year 2020 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1021/jacs.0c05128 2020

  23. [23]

    Bím \ and\ author A

    author author D. Bím \ and\ author A. N. \ Alexandrova ,\ 10.1021/acscatal.1c00687 journal journal ACS Catal. \ volume 11 ,\ pages 6534 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1021/acscatal.1c00687 2021

  24. [24]

    author author M. E. \ Eberhart , author T. R. \ Wilson , author T. E. \ Jones , \ and\ author A. N. \ Alexandrova ,\ 10.1073/pnas.2411976121 journal journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences \ volume 121 ,\ pages e2411976121 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.2411976121 2024

  25. [25]

    author author A. C. \ Aragonès , author N. L. \ Haworth , author N. Darwish , author S. Ciampi , author E. J. \ Mannix , author G. G. \ Wallace , author I. Diez-Perez , \ and\ author M. L. \ Coote ,\ 10.1038/nature16989 journal journal Nature \ volume 531 ,\ pages 88 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1038/nature16989 2016

  26. [26]

    Shaik , author D

    author author S. Shaik , author D. Mandal , \ and\ author R. Ramanan ,\ 10.1038/nchem.2651 journal journal Nature Chem \ volume 8 ,\ pages 1091 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1038/nchem.2651 2016

  27. [27]

    Stuyver , author D

    author author T. Stuyver , author D. Danovich , author J. Joy , \ and\ author S. Shaik ,\ 10.1002/wcms.1438 journal journal WIREs Computational Molecular Science \ volume 10 ,\ pages e1438 ( year 2020 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1002/wcms.1438 2020

  28. [28]

    Zheng , author Y

    author author C. Zheng , author Y. Mao , author J. Kozuch , author A. O. \ Atsango , author Z. Ji , author T. E. \ Markland , \ and\ author S. G. \ Boxer ,\ 10.1038/s41557-022-00937-w journal journal Nat. Chem. \ volume 14 ,\ pages 891 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1038/s41557-022-00937-w 2022

  29. [29]

    author author V. V. \ Welborn \ and\ author T. Head-Gordon ,\ 10.1021/jacs.9b05323 journal journal J. Am. Chem. Soc. \ volume 141 ,\ pages 12487 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1021/jacs.9b05323 2019

  30. [30]

    Morita \ and\ author J

    author author A. Morita \ and\ author J. T. \ Hynes ,\ 10.1016/S0301-0104(00)00127-0 journal journal Chemical Physics \ volume 258 ,\ pages 371 ( year 2000 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1016/s0301-0104(00)00127-0 2000

  31. [31]

    Du , author R

    author author Q. Du , author R. Superfine , author E. Freysz , \ and\ author Y. R. \ Shen ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.70.2313 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 70 ,\ pages 2313 ( year 1993 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.70.2313 1993

  32. [32]

    author author G. R. \ Medders \ and\ author F. Paesani ,\ 10.1021/jacs.6b00893 journal journal J. Am. Chem. Soc. \ volume 138 ,\ pages 3912 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1021/jacs.6b00893 2016

  33. [33]

    author author D. R. \ Moberg , author S. C. \ Straight , \ and\ author F. Paesani ,\ 10.1021/acs.jpcb.8b01726 journal journal J. Phys. Chem. B \ volume 122 ,\ pages 4356 ( year 2018 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.jpcb.8b01726 2018

  34. [34]

    Pezzotti , author D

    author author S. Pezzotti , author D. R. \ Galimberti , \ and\ author M.-P. \ Gaigeot ,\ 10.1021/acs.jpclett.7b01257 journal journal J. Phys. Chem. Lett. \ volume 8 ,\ pages 3133 ( year 2017 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.jpclett.7b01257 2017

  35. [35]

    Pezzotti , author A

    author author S. Pezzotti , author A. Serva , \ and\ author M.-P. \ Gaigeot ,\ 10.1063/1.5018096 journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 148 ,\ pages 174701 ( year 2018 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1063/1.5018096 2018

  36. [36]

    author author R. J. \ Cooper , author J. T. \ O'Brien , author T. M. \ Chang , \ and\ author E. R. \ Williams ,\ 10.1039/C7SC00481H journal journal Chem. Sci. \ volume 8 ,\ pages 5201 ( year 2017 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1039/c7sc00481h 2017

  37. [37]

    Hao , author I

    author author H. Hao , author I. Leven , \ and\ author T. Head-Gordon ,\ 10.1038/s41467-021-27941-x journal journal Nat Commun \ volume 13 ,\ pages 280 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-021-27941-x 2022

  38. [38]

    author author S. M. \ Kathmann , author I.-F. W. \ Kuo , author C. J. \ Mundy , \ and\ author G. K. \ Schenter ,\ 10.1021/jp1116036 journal journal J. Phys. Chem. B \ volume 115 ,\ pages 4369 ( year 2011 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1021/jp1116036 2011

  39. [39]

    author author F. H. \ Stillinger ,\ 10.1126/science.209.4455.451 journal journal Science \ volume 209 ,\ pages 451 ( year 1980 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1126/science.209.4455.451 1980

  40. [40]

    Franks ,\ @noop en title Water: A Matrix of Life \ ( publisher Royal Society of Chemistry ,\ year 2000 ) NoStop

    author author F. Franks ,\ @noop en title Water: A Matrix of Life \ ( publisher Royal Society of Chemistry ,\ year 2000 ) NoStop

    2000

  41. [41]

    Ball ,\ @noop en title Life's Matrix : A Biography of Water \ ( publisher University of California Press ,\ year 2001 ) NoStop

    author author P. Ball ,\ @noop en title Life's Matrix : A Biography of Water \ ( publisher University of California Press ,\ year 2001 ) NoStop

    2001

  42. [42]

    author author W. H. \ Stockmayer ,\ 10.1063/1.1750858 journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 9 ,\ pages 863 ( year 1941 a ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1750858 1941

  43. [43]

    author author W. H. \ Stockmayer ,\ 10.1063/1.1750922 journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 9 ,\ pages 398 ( year 1941 b ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1750922 1941

  44. [44]

    author author C. J. \ Shock , author M. J. \ Stevens , author A. L. \ Frischknecht , \ and\ author I. Nakamura ,\ 10.1021/acs.jpcb.0c00769 journal journal J. Phys. Chem. B \ volume 124 ,\ pages 4598 ( year 2020 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1021/acs.jpcb.0c00769 2020

  45. [45]

    Bagchi \ and\ author B

    author author B. Bagchi \ and\ author B. Jana ,\ 10.1039/B902048A journal journal Chem. Soc. Rev. \ volume 39 ,\ pages 1936 ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1039/b902048a 1936

  46. [46]

    Perera \ and\ author M

    author author L. Perera \ and\ author M. L. \ Berkowitz ,\ 10.1063/1.461954 journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 96 ,\ pages 3092 ( year 1992 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1063/1.461954 1992

  47. [47]

    Adams \ and\ author E

    author author D. Adams \ and\ author E. Adams ,\ 10.1080/00268978100100701 journal journal Molecular Physics \ volume 42 ,\ pages 907 ( year 1981 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1080/00268978100100701 1981

  48. [48]

    author author E. L. \ Pollock \ and\ author B. J. \ Alder ,\ 10.1016/0378-4371(80)90058-8 journal journal Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications \ volume 102 ,\ pages 1 ( year 1980 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1016/0378-4371(80)90058-8 1980

  49. [49]

    author author C. J. \ Shock , author M. J. \ Stevens , author A. L. \ Frischknecht , \ and\ author I. Nakamura ,\ 10.1063/5.0165481 journal journal The Journal of Chemical Physics \ volume 159 ,\ pages 134507 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0165481 2023

  50. [50]

    Groh \ and\ author S

    author author B. Groh \ and\ author S. Dietrich ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevE.50.3814 journal journal Phys. Rev. E \ volume 50 ,\ pages 3814 ( year 1994 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.50.3814 1994

  51. [51]

    author author J. J. \ Weis \ and\ author D. Levesque ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevE.48.3728 journal journal Phys. Rev. E \ volume 48 ,\ pages 3728 ( year 1993 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.48.3728 1993

  52. [52]

    author author M. A. \ Pounds \ and\ author P. A. \ Madden ,\ 10.1063/1.2672734 journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 126 ,\ pages 104506 ( year 2007 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1063/1.2672734 2007

  53. [53]

    Bartke \ and\ author R

    author author J. Bartke \ and\ author R. Hentschke ,\ 10.1080/00268970600961990 journal journal Molecular Physics \ volume 104 ,\ pages 3057 ( year 2006 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1080/00268970600961990 2006

  54. [54]

    Marx , author M

    author author J. Marx , author M. Kohns , \ and\ author K. Langenbach ,\ 10.1002/cite.202255007 journal journal Chemie Ingenieur Technik \ volume 94 ,\ pages 1345 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1002/cite.202255007 2022

  55. [55]

    Marx , author M

    author author J. Marx , author M. Kohns , \ and\ author K. Langenbach ,\ 10.1016/j.fluid.2023.113742 journal journal Fluid Phase Equilibria \ volume 568 ,\ pages 113742 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    arXiv 2023

  56. [56]

    author author S. G. \ Moore , author M. J. \ Stevens , \ and\ author G. S. \ Grest ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevE.91.022309 journal journal Phys. Rev. E \ volume 91 ,\ pages 022309 ( year 2015 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.91.022309 2015

  57. [57]

    Frodl \ and\ author S

    author author P. Frodl \ and\ author S. Dietrich ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevA.45.7330 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 45 ,\ pages 7330 ( year 1992 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.45.7330 1992

  58. [58]

    Frodl \ and\ author S

    author author P. Frodl \ and\ author S. Dietrich ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevE.48.3741 journal journal Phys. Rev. E \ volume 48 ,\ pages 3741 ( year 1993 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.48.3741 1993

  59. [59]

    Iatsevitch \ and\ author F

    author author S. Iatsevitch \ and\ author F. Forstmann ,\ 10.1080/002689700413569 journal journal Molecular Physics \ volume 98 ,\ pages 1309 ( year 2000 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1080/002689700413569 2000

  60. [60]

    Mecke , author J

    author author M. Mecke , author J. Fischer , \ and\ author J. Winkelmann ,\ 10.1063/1.1349177 journal journal The Journal of Chemical Physics \ volume 114 ,\ pages 5842 ( year 2001 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1349177 2001

  61. [61]

    Enders , author H

    author author S. Enders , author H. Kahl , author M. Mecke , \ and\ author J. Winkelmann ,\ 10.1016/j.molliq.2003.12.020 journal journal Journal of Molecular Liquids \ volume 115 ,\ pages 29 ( year 2004 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1016/j.molliq.2003.12.020 2003

  62. [62]

    Eggebrecht , author S

    author author J. Eggebrecht , author S. M. \ Thompson , \ and\ author K. E. \ Gubbins ,\ 10.1063/1.452128 journal journal The Journal of Chemical Physics \ volume 86 ,\ pages 2299 ( year 1987 a ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1063/1.452128 1987

  63. [63]

    Langenbach ,\ 10.1016/j.ces.2017.08.025 journal journal Chemical Engineering Science \ volume 174 ,\ pages 40 ( year 2017 ) NoStop

    author author K. Langenbach ,\ 10.1016/j.ces.2017.08.025 journal journal Chemical Engineering Science \ volume 174 ,\ pages 40 ( year 2017 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ces.2017.08.025 2017

  64. [64]

    Kusaka , author Z.-G

    author author I. Kusaka , author Z.-G. \ Wang , \ and\ author J. H. \ Seinfeld ,\ 10.1063/1.469158 journal journal The Journal of Chemical Physics \ volume 102 ,\ pages 913 ( year 1995 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1063/1.469158 1995

  65. [65]

    Kohns , author J

    author author M. Kohns , author J. Marx , \ and\ author K. Langenbach ,\ 10.1021/acs.jced.0c00769 journal journal J. Chem. Eng. Data \ volume 65 ,\ pages 5891 ( year 2020 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.jced.0c00769 2020

  66. [66]

    author author A. Stukowski ,\ 10.1088/0965-0393/18/1/015012 journal journal MODELLING AND SIMULATION IN MATERIALS SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING \ volume 18 ( year 2010 ),\ 10.1088/0965-0393/18/1/015012 NoStop

    doi:10.1088/0965-0393/18/1/015012 2010

  67. [67]

    author author M. P. \ Allen \ and\ author D. J. \ Tildesley ,\ https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198803195.001.0001 title Computer Simulation of Liquids \ ( publisher Oxford University Press ,\ year 2017 ) NoStop

    arXiv 2017

  68. [68]

    Kamberaj , author R

    author author H. Kamberaj , author R. J. \ Low , \ and\ author M. P. \ Neal ,\ 10.1063/1.1906216 journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 122 ,\ pages 224114 ( year 2005 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1906216 2005

  69. [69]

    Toukmaji , author C

    author author A. Toukmaji , author C. Sagui , author J. Board , \ and\ author T. Darden ,\ 10.1063/1.1324708 journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 113 ,\ pages 10913 ( year 2000 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1324708 2000

  70. [70]

    author author J. J. \ Cerdà , author V. Ballenegger , author O. Lenz , \ and\ author C. Holm ,\ 10.1063/1.3000389 journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 129 ,\ pages 234104 ( year 2008 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1063/1.3000389 2008

  71. [71]

    Jungwirth \ and\ author D

    author author P. Jungwirth \ and\ author D. J. \ Tobias ,\ 10.1021/cr0403741 journal journal Chem. Rev. \ volume 106 ,\ pages 1259 ( year 2006 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1021/cr0403741 2006

  72. [72]

    Matsumoto \ and\ author Y

    author author M. Matsumoto \ and\ author Y. Kataoka ,\ 10.1063/1.453919 journal journal The Journal of Chemical Physics \ volume 88 ,\ pages 3233 ( year 1988 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1063/1.453919 1988

  73. [73]

    Matsumoto \ and\ author Y

    author author M. Matsumoto \ and\ author Y. Kataoka ,\ 10.1063/1.455982 journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 90 ,\ pages 2398 ( year 1989 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1063/1.455982 1989

  74. [74]

    author author J. R. \ Cendagorta \ and\ author T. Ichiye ,\ 10.1021/jp508878v journal journal J. Phys. Chem. B \ volume 119 ,\ pages 9114 ( year 2015 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1021/jp508878v 2015

  75. [75]

    author author Y. L. \ Yeh , author C. Zhang , author H. Held , author A. M. \ Mebel , author X. Wei , author S. H. \ Lin , \ and\ author Y. R. \ Shen ,\ 10.1063/1.1333761 journal journal The Journal of Chemical Physics \ volume 114 ,\ pages 1837 ( year 2001 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1333761 2001

  76. [76]

    author author M. T. C. \ Martins-Costa \ and\ author M. F. \ Ruiz-López ,\ 10.1021/jacs.2c12089 journal journal J. Am. Chem. Soc. \ volume 145 ,\ pages 1400 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1021/jacs.2c12089 2023

  77. [77]

    author author I.-F. W. \ Kuo \ and\ author C. J. \ Mundy ,\ 10.1126/science.1092787 journal journal Science \ volume 303 ,\ pages 658 ( year 2004 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1092787 2004

  78. [78]

    author author D. J. \ Tobias , author A. C. \ Stern , author M. D. \ Baer , author Y. Levin , \ and\ author C. J. \ Mundy ,\ 10.1146/annurev-physchem-040412-110049 journal journal Annual Review of Physical Chemistry \ volume 64 ,\ pages 339 ( year 2013 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-physchem-040412-110049 2013

  79. [79]

    author author S. M. \ Kathmann , author I.-F. W. \ Kuo , \ and\ author C. J. \ Mundy ,\ 10.1021/ja802851w journal journal J. Am. Chem. Soc. \ volume 130 ,\ pages 16556 ( year 2008 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1021/ja802851w 2008

  80. [80]

    author author C. J. \ Mundy , author I.-F. W. \ Kuo , author M. E. \ Tuckerman , author H.-S. \ Lee , \ and\ author D. J. \ Tobias ,\ 10.1016/j.cplett.2009.09.003 journal journal Chemical Physics Letters \ volume 481 ,\ pages 2 ( year 2009 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cplett.2009.09.003 2009

Showing first 80 references.

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 5, 2026.