Structure searching methods: general discussion
Structure searching methods: general discussion
复制标题
结构搜索方法:一般讨论
DOI:
10.1039/c8fd90030b
复制
发表时间:
2018
影响因子:
3.4
通讯作者:
Cooper, Andrew
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
Addicoat, Matthew;Adjiman, Claire S.;Arhangelskis, Mihails;Beran, Gregory J.;Brandenburg, Jan Gerit;Braun, Doris E.;Burger, Virginia;Burow, Asbjoern;Collins, Christopher;Cooper, Andrew
Graeme M. Day opened the discussion of the introductory lecture by Sarah L. Price: You have nicely outlined a vision for a crystal structure prediction code and what its capabilities should be. In this, you have not said much about what analysis methods this code should have for understanding and interrogating the structure sets that are generated. The crystal structure prediction community, at least in the molecular organic eld, has mainly borrowed methods from the analysis of experimental crystal structures. These can be useful, but do we need more sophisticated approaches to get the most information from computed sets of structures? I am interested in hearing your thoughts on what analysis methods need to be part of a general crystal structure prediction code.Sarah L. Price answered: This is a difficult question, as it is still a matter of debate how different two structures have to be to count as polymorphs when working with experimental structures, with many of the difficulties relating to polytypes or disorder, where CSP analysis needs further development. Most of the methods used to compare experimental structures are appropriate for CSP generated structures, assuming that duplicates which only differ in the cell choice have already been eliminated. We certainly need to be able to cluster structures into families so that members of the same family could be observed as disorder components of experimental structures or be deemed to be so readily able to transform into the most stable structures of the family somewhere along the nucleation and growth pathway that they could not be observed, or are closely