ArticleThe journal of physical chemistry. B2026
How Well Do Molecular Dynamics Force Fields Model Peptides: A Systematic Benchmark across Diverse Folding Behaviors.
Article in The journal of physical chemistry. B, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Loop Plasticity Drives Paralog-Specific Recognition in BET ET Domains.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Linear peptides play essential roles in biology and drug discovery, frequently mediating protein-protein interactions through short, flexible motifs. However, their structural plasticity─ranging from disordered to context-dependent folding─makes them challenging targets for molecular simulations. In this work, we benchmark the performance of 11 popular and emerging fixed-charge force fields across a curated set of 12 peptides spanning structured miniproteins, context-sensitive epitopes, and disordered sequences. Each peptide was simulated from both folded (200 ns) and extended (10 μs) states to assess stability, folding behavior, and force field biases. Our analysis reveals consistent trends: some force fields exhibit strong structural bias, others allow reversible fluctuations, and no single model performs optimally across all systems. The study highlights limitations in current force fields' ability to balance disorder and secondary structure, particularly when modeling conformational selection. These results offer practical guidance for peptide modeling and establish a benchmark framework for future force field development and validation in peptide-relevant regimes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.