From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Thu Oct 13 10:09:01 2011 From: "Steve Williams willsd*|*APPSTATE.EDU" To: CCL Subject: CCL:G: anharmonic vibrational frequencies and IR intensities Message-Id: <-45625-111013100529-26398-yu44WBfbxtIDGY7A/XA3wA^server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: Steve Williams Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 09:59:08 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: Steve Williams [willsd]^[APPSTATE.EDU] I am interested in methods for ab initio computation of IR spectra and am curious about codes that can perform some or all of the steps below. I know about scale factors for frequencies and force constants to improve harmonic frequencies, and this is not what I'm interested in here. I'd like to find out about what ab initio codes can: 1) Compute anharmonic frequencies for fundamental modes, 2) Compute anharmonic frequencies for overtones and combination bands, 3) Compute anharmonic IR intensities for fundamental modes, and 4) Compute anharmonic IR intensities for overtones and combination bands. I know the following: Gaussian and Qchem can do 1 and 2, but not the intensities in 3 and 4. GAMESS-US and Cfour can do 1,2,3, and 4. Molpro can do 1 and possibly 2, but I'm not sure about 3 or 4 (I don't use molpro and I did find in the online manual explict statements about overtones, combination bands, and IR intensities.) I'd appreciate any information about any ab initio codes with capabilities in any of these areas. Thanks, Steve Williams From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Thu Oct 13 13:01:01 2011 From: "Herbert Fruchtl herbert.fruchtl() st-andrews.ac.uk" To: CCL Subject: CCL:G: Gaussian: enforce symmetry Message-Id: <-45626-111013125413-921-0QggVih4A0A3ONbozeSTCg|-|server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: Herbert Fruchtl Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 17:54:32 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: Herbert Fruchtl [herbert.fruchtl[a]st-andrews.ac.uk] How do I prevent a Gaussian DFT calculation from changing symmetry during a geometry optimisation? I have a largish molecule that's not flat in the gas phase, but I would like to optimise it like this anyway, which would presumably give me a higher-order saddle point. I start completely flat (all z-coordinates 0). The output reports Cs symmetry. But after the first geometry step, I get: Omega: Change in point group or standard orientation. ...and from then on it's C1. The grid I'm using is ultrafine. I also tried to enforce planarity using ModDredundant (basically freezing all dihedrals at 0 or 180 degrees), but then the iterative enforcement of ModRedundant doesn't converge (which tends to happen if there are too many constraints). Is there a way to prevent this behaviour? Thanks in advance, Herbert -- Herbert Fruchtl Senior Scientific Computing Officer School of Chemistry, School of Mathematics and Statistics University of St Andrews -- The University of St Andrews is a charity registered in Scotland: No SC013532 From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Thu Oct 13 14:02:00 2011 From: "eurisco1|pochta.ru" To: CCL Subject: CCL:G: Gaussian: enforce symmetry Message-Id: <-45627-111013134742-11203-CJaga5izG+EO1pUOXvtSPQ ~~ server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="UTF-8"; reply-type=response Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 21:47:28 +0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: [eurisco1!=!pochta.ru] Dear Herbert Fruchtl, I suggest to use in input special keyword symm(PG=CS) I hope it will be suitable. Sincerely, Ol Ga -----Исходное сообщение----- > From: Herbert Fruchtl herbert.fruchtl() st-andrews.ac.uk Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 8:54 PM To: Ga, Ol Subject: CCL:G: Gaussian: enforce symmetry Sent to CCL by: Herbert Fruchtl [herbert.fruchtl[a]st-andrews.ac.uk] How do I prevent a Gaussian DFT calculation from changing symmetry during a geometry optimisation? I have a largish molecule that's not flat in the gas phase, but I would like to optimise it like this anyway, which would presumably give me a higher-order saddle point. I start completely flat (all z-coordinates 0). The output reports Cs symmetry. But after the first geometry step, I get: Omega: Change in point group or standard orientation. ..and from then on it's C1. The grid I'm using is ultrafine. I also tried to enforce planarity using ModDredundant (basically freezing all dihedrals at 0 or 180 degrees), but then the iterative enforcement of ModRedundant doesn't converge (which tends to happen if there are too many constraints). Is there a way to prevent this behaviour? Thanks in advance, Herbert -- Herbert Fruchtl Senior Scientific Computing Officer School of Chemistry, School of Mathematics and Statistics University of St Andrews -- The University of St Andrews is a charity registered in Scotland: No SC013532http://www.ccl.net/cgi-bin/ccl/send_ccl_messagehttp://www.ccl.net/chemistry/sub_unsub.shtmlhttp://www.ccl.net/spammers.txt From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Thu Oct 13 14:52:00 2011 From: "Cory Pye cpye _ ap.smu.ca" To: CCL Subject: CCL:G: Gaussian: enforce symmetry Message-Id: <-45628-111013144521-23781-m6VWmdFjB/aCbWohtgqdOA : server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: Cory Pye Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 15:52:41 -0300 (ADT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: Cory Pye [cpye,+,ap.smu.ca] Herbert, Construct a z-matrix for the molecule, then use opt=(z-matrix,XXX) where XXX are any other options you need. By construction, your dihedrals should be fixed at either 0 or 180. -Cory On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Herbert Fruchtl herbert.fruchtl() st-andrews.ac.uk wrote: > > Sent to CCL by: Herbert Fruchtl [herbert.fruchtl[a]st-andrews.ac.uk] > How do I prevent a Gaussian DFT calculation from changing symmetry during a > geometry optimisation? > > I have a largish molecule that's not flat in the gas phase, but I would like to > optimise it like this anyway, which would presumably give me a higher-order > saddle point. I start completely flat (all z-coordinates 0). The output reports > Cs symmetry. But after the first geometry step, I get: > > Omega: Change in point group or standard orientation. > > ...and from then on it's C1. > > The grid I'm using is ultrafine. I also tried to enforce planarity using > ModDredundant (basically freezing all dihedrals at 0 or 180 degrees), but then > the iterative enforcement of ModRedundant doesn't converge (which tends to > happen if there are too many constraints). > > Is there a way to prevent this behaviour? > > Thanks in advance, > > Herbert > -- > Herbert Fruchtl > Senior Scientific Computing Officer > School of Chemistry, School of Mathematics and Statistics > University of St Andrews > -- > The University of St Andrews is a charity registered in Scotland: > No SC013532> > ************* ! Dr. Cory C. Pye ***************** ! Associate Professor *** ** ** ** ! Theoretical and Computational Chemistry ** * **** ! Department of Chemistry, Saint Mary's University ** * * ! 923 Robie Street, Halifax, NS B3H 3C3 ** * * ! cpye=-=crux.stmarys.ca http://apwww.stmarys.ca/~cpye *** * * ** ! Ph: (902)-420-5654 FAX:(902)-496-8104 ***************** ! ************* ! Les Hartree-Focks (Apologies to Montreal Canadien Fans) From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Thu Oct 13 15:27:00 2011 From: "Cory Pye cpye[a]ap.smu.ca" To: CCL Subject: CCL:G: AIMall energy of water dimer gives huge error with CP/ BSSE correction Message-Id: <-45629-111013145052-30458-feCvI7T4IoOFkZxtkF8C7A!A!server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: Cory Pye Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 15:58:14 -0300 (ADT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: Cory Pye [cpye ~~ ap.smu.ca] Hello Laura (from down the street), sounds like it might be a problem with dimension. When a BSSE calculation is done using the counterpoise correction, the wavefunction of the monomer is expanded to include the basis functions of the other monomer. So the effective basis set size is different. The way Gaussian does this is to add the basis functions of the other monomer at the same geometry, but setting the nuclear charge to zero. -Cory On Tue, 11 Oct 2011, Laura Albrecht lauraalbrecht/./dal.ca wrote: > > Sent to CCL by: "Laura Albrecht" [lauraalbrecht..dal.ca] > Hello CCL subscribers. > > > I am attempting calculation of water dimers at MP2/aug-cc-pVTZ level theory corrected for BSSE with the Boys and Bernardi counterpoise approach (implemented with the counterpoise=2 option in G09 vs A.02). After a single point calculation the formatted checkpoint file is analyzed using the AIMall programs. I use AimQB to write the .wfn file. > > The resulting total energies as given by AIMall are ~318 kcal/mol greater than the G09 EUPM2 final energies. If I neglect the CP correction in G09 calculation, the AIM calculated total energies are only ~0.01 kcal/mol greater than the (more accurate) G09 energies. AIM energies are taken from the .sumviz file, no modifications. > > Optimizing the geometry to include CP correction does not solve the issue, and neither does improving the basis set. The virial ratio is 2.00173 for single point and 2.000978 for optimized (no CP) and 2.001699 (with CP) > > Is there a known issue with AIMall calculations on G09/Counterpoise output? Is it possible that G09 writes the (formatted)checkpoint file in a different way when it applies CP correction, and thus the aimQB program is misprinting the .wfn file? Finally, is it even necessary to use the BSSE corrected .fchk file for the AIM calculation since the final wavefunction should be essentially the same, since CP correction on a SP calculation just yields an energy correction factor and does not change the dimer electron density topology (?). > > Any hints or literature direction would be immensely appreciated. > > > Sincerely, > > > Laura Albrecht > Dalhousie University, > Halifax, NS, Canada> > ************* ! Dr. Cory C. Pye ***************** ! Associate Professor *** ** ** ** ! Theoretical and Computational Chemistry ** * **** ! Department of Chemistry, Saint Mary's University ** * * ! 923 Robie Street, Halifax, NS B3H 3C3 ** * * ! cpye{:}crux.stmarys.ca http://apwww.stmarys.ca/~cpye *** * * ** ! Ph: (902)-420-5654 FAX:(902)-496-8104 ***************** ! ************* ! Les Hartree-Focks (Apologies to Montreal Canadien Fans) From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Thu Oct 13 16:02:00 2011 From: "eurisco1---pochta.ru" To: CCL Subject: CCL: Predicting the Electronic Spectrum of 1,3-butadiene Message-Id: <-45630-111013143601-7216-F/SoSQF/3yivQlzTQSGa0Q(_)server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="koi8-r"; reply-type=original Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 22:35:42 +0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: [eurisco1(-)pochta.ru] Dear Gustavo L.C. Moura, >Is the 1,3-butadiene a known problematic molecule for spectroscopy? Do you mean for experimental measurements? In general, if high precision and accuracy are required, any system can be considered such a difficult case. >How can both my calculation and the best >theoretical estimate be so far >from experiment? Yes, it happens. :-) Sometimes it is very difficult to catch correlation effects even if it is so-called "best theoretical estimate". Maybe you need to play a lot with active space and /or expand basis set. I would suggest to go beyond CASPT2 and apply MRCI (there are several proposed methods - not only SORCI and dft-mrci hybrid). >How can DFT results be >so close to the experimental result? Yes, it happens. :-) DFT is black box , TD-DFT is black box in black box. Maybe you need to check different functionals. >So far, with the exception of the 1,3-butadiene molecule, all my SORCI >calculations are very close to the experimental Really, it is difficult to say. There is a lot of uncertainty. Sincerely, Ol Ga ----- ----- > From: Gustavo L.C. Moura gustavo.moura%%ufpe.br Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 10:55 PM To: Ga, Ol Subject: CCL: Predicting the Electronic Spectrum of 1,3-butadiene Sent to CCL by: "Gustavo L.C. Moura" [gustavo.moura!A!ufpe.br] Dear CCL Readers, As one step of a larger project, I have calculated the excitation energy for the first singlet excited state of 1,3-butadiene using the SORCI technique with the TZV(2D,2P)++ basis set. The result I got was 6.37eV (~195nm). In the article M. Schreiber, M. R. Silva-Junior, S. P. a Sauer, and W. Thiel, Benchmarks for electronically excited states: CASPT2, CC2, CCSD, and CC3., The Journal of Chemical Physics, vol. 128, no. 13, p. 134110, Apr. 2008, it is quoted that the best theoretical estimate from ab initio calculation for this excitation is 6.18eV. Therefore, my calculated result is reasonably close to the best theoretical estimate. However, the experimental gas phase value for this transition is 217nm (~5.7eV), as can be seen from http://www.atmosphere.mpg.de/spektrum_image3.php?subkat=Dienes&kat=Alkenes%2Cdienes%2Bradicals&file=CH2%3DCHCH%3DCH2_218-333K_lin.JPG Therefore, both my result and the best ab initio estimate are not close to the experimental result. In the article M. R. Silva-Junior, M. Schreiber, S. P. a Sauer, and W. Thiel, Benchmarks for electronically excited states: time-dependent density functional theory and density functional theory based multireference configuration interaction., The Journal of Chemical Physics, vol. 129, no. 10, p. 104103, Sep. 2008, it is quoted a value of 5.74eV from B3LYP calculations for the first singlet excited state of 1,3-butadiene. Is the 1,3-butadiene a known problematic molecule for spectroscopy? How can both my calculation and the best theoretical estimate be so far from experiment? How can DFT results be so close to the experimental result? So far, with the exception of the 1,3-butadiene molecule, all my SORCI calculations are very close to the experimental ones. Sincerely yours, Gustavo L.C. Mourahttp://www.ccl.net/cgi-bin/ccl/send_ccl_messagehttp://www.ccl.net/chemistry/sub_unsub.shtmlhttp://www.ccl.net/spammers.txt From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Thu Oct 13 16:37:00 2011 From: "Bradley Welch bwelch5()slu.edu" To: CCL Subject: CCL:G: Gaussian: enforce symmetry Message-Id: <-45631-111013150337-16495-yAZ15DO9HVRTaDJO3ylpfg%%server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: Bradley Welch Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba212459f6bfa904af32ca71 Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 14:03:15 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: Bradley Welch [bwelch5 _ slu.edu] --90e6ba212459f6bfa904af32ca71 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I want to say use the Symm=Loose command. Bradley Welch Saint Louis University On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Herbert Fruchtl herbert.fruchtl() st-andrews.ac.uk wrote: > > Sent to CCL by: Herbert Fruchtl [herbert.fruchtl[a]st-andrews.**ac.uk > ] > How do I prevent a Gaussian DFT calculation from changing symmetry during a > geometry optimisation? > > I have a largish molecule that's not flat in the gas phase, but I would > like to optimise it like this anyway, which would presumably give me a > higher-order saddle point. I start completely flat (all z-coordinates 0). > The output reports Cs symmetry. But after the first geometry step, I get: > > Omega: Change in point group or standard orientation. > > ...and from then on it's C1. > > The grid I'm using is ultrafine. I also tried to enforce planarity using > ModDredundant (basically freezing all dihedrals at 0 or 180 degrees), but > then the iterative enforcement of ModRedundant doesn't converge (which tends > to happen if there are too many constraints). > > Is there a way to prevent this behaviour? > > Thanks in advance, > > Herbert > -- > Herbert Fruchtl > Senior Scientific Computing Officer > School of Chemistry, School of Mathematics and Statistics > University of St Andrews > -- > The University of St Andrews is a charity registered in Scotland: > No SC013532> http://www.ccl.net/cgi-bin/**ccl/send_ccl_message http://www.ccl.net/cgi-bin/**ccl/send_ccl_message chemistry/announcements/**conferences/ > > Search Messages: http://www.ccl.net/chemistry/**searchccl/index.shtml http://www.ccl.net/spammers.**txt > > RTFI: http://www.ccl.net/chemistry/**aboutccl/instructions/ > > > --90e6ba212459f6bfa904af32ca71 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I want to say use the Symm=3DLoose command.=A0


Bradley Welch
Saint Louis University

On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Herbert Fruchtl herbert.fruch= tl() st-andrews.ac.uk <owner-chemistry{}ccl.net= > wrote:

Sent to CCL by: Herbert Fruchtl [herbert.fruchtl[a]st-andrews.ac.uk]
How do I prevent a Gaussian DFT calculation from changing symmetry during a= geometry optimisation?

I have a largish molecule that's not flat in the gas phase, but I would= like to optimise it like this anyway, which would presumably give me a hig= her-order saddle point. I start completely flat (all z-coordinates 0). The = output reports Cs symmetry. But after the first geometry step, I get:

Omega: Change in point group or standard orientation.

...and from then on it's C1.

The grid I'm using is ultrafine. I also tried to enforce planarity usin= g ModDredundant (basically freezing all dihedrals at 0 or 180 degrees), but= then the iterative enforcement of ModRedundant doesn't converge (which= tends to happen if there are too many constraints).

Is there a way to prevent this behaviour?

Thanks in advance,

=A0Herbert
--
Herbert Fruchtl
Senior Scientific Computing Officer
School of Chemistry, School of Mathematics and Statistics
University of St Andrews
--
The University of St Andrews is a charity registered in Scotland:
No SC013532



-=3D This is automatically added to each message by the mailing script =3D-=
E-mail to subscribers: CHEMISTRY{}ccl.net or use:
=A0 =A0 http://www.ccl.net/cgi-bin/ccl/send_ccl_message

E-mail to administrators: CHEMISTRY-REQUEST{}ccl.net or use
=A0 =A0 http://www.ccl.net/cgi-bin/ccl/send_ccl_message
http://www.ccl.net/chemistry/sub_u= nsub.shtml

Before posting, check wait time at: http://www.ccl.net

Job: http://www.ccl.n= et/jobs Conferences: http://server.ccl.net/chemist= ry/announcements/conferences/

Search Messages: http://www.ccl.net/chemistry/searchccl/index.= shtml
=A0 =A0 http= ://www.ccl.net/spammers.txt

RTFI: http://www.ccl.net/chemistry/aboutccl/instructions/=



--90e6ba212459f6bfa904af32ca71-- From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Thu Oct 13 18:09:00 2011 From: "Johannes Hachmann jh~!~chemistry.harvard.edu" To: CCL Subject: CCL:G: Gaussian: enforce symmetry Message-Id: <-45632-111013152951-902-sJYDay9mv51tSsD60s6f3Q-x-server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: "Johannes Hachmann" Content-Language: en-us Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 15:29:33 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: "Johannes Hachmann" [jh^-^chemistry.harvard.edu] I think SYMM=FOLLOW should work. See http://www.gaussian.com/g_tech/g_ur/k_symmetry.htm Best Johannes ----------------------------------------------- Dr. Johannes Hachmann Postdoctoral Fellow Aspuru-Guzik Research Group Harvard University Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology 12 Oxford St, Rm M104A Cambridge, MA 02138 USA eMail: jh|a|chemistry.harvard.edu ----------------------------------------------- > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-chemistry+jh388==cornell.edu|a|ccl.net [mailto:owner- > chemistry+jh388==cornell.edu|a|ccl.net] On Behalf Of Herbert Fruchtl > herbert.fruchtl() st-andrews.ac.uk > Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 12:55 > To: Hachmann, Johannes > Subject: CCL:G: Gaussian: enforce symmetry > > > Sent to CCL by: Herbert Fruchtl [herbert.fruchtl[a]st-andrews.ac.uk] > How do I prevent a Gaussian DFT calculation from changing symmetry > during a > geometry optimisation? > > I have a largish molecule that's not flat in the gas phase, but I > would like to > optimise it like this anyway, which would presumably give me a > higher-order > saddle point. I start completely flat (all z-coordinates 0). The > output reports > Cs symmetry. But after the first geometry step, I get: > > Omega: Change in point group or standard orientation. > > ...and from then on it's C1. > > The grid I'm using is ultrafine. I also tried to enforce planarity > using > ModDredundant (basically freezing all dihedrals at 0 or 180 > degrees), but then > the iterative enforcement of ModRedundant doesn't converge (which > tends to > happen if there are too many constraints). > > Is there a way to prevent this behaviour? > > Thanks in advance, > > Herbert > -- > Herbert Fruchtl > Senior Scientific Computing Officer > School of Chemistry, School of Mathematics and Statistics > University of St Andrews > -- > The University of St Andrews is a charity registered in Scotland: > No SC013532 > > > > -= This is automatically added to each message by the mailing script > =- > To recover the email address of the author of the message, please > change> Conferences: > http://server.ccl.net/chemistry/announcements/conferences/ From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Thu Oct 13 18:44:00 2011 From: "Tudor Oprea toprea###salud.unm.edu" To: CCL Subject: CCL: REMINDER - call for papers - ACS San Diego - CINF "Systems chemical biology and other "systems" approaches" Message-Id: <-45633-111013172939-7688-TgxvOZtq55jQeyuUnv6xjA]=[server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: "Tudor Oprea" Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=__PartD2FD063B.0__=" Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 15:29:15 -0600 Mime-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: "Tudor Oprea" [toprea^_^salud.unm.edu] This is a MIME message. If you are reading this text, you may want to consider changing to a mail reader or gateway that understands how to properly handle MIME multipart messages. --=__PartD2FD063B.0__= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=__PartD2FD063B.1__=" --=__PartD2FD063B.1__= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ** High Priority ** DEADLINE Oct 31, but please notify us if you plan to submit an abstract. =20 =20 =20 Call for papers Session title: Systems chemical biology and other "systems" approaches in chemistry and biology research 243rd ACS National Meeting, San Diego, California, March 25-29, 2012 CINF Division =20 We are accepting submission of abstracts for consideration for an ACS Division of Chemical Information (CINF) Symposium on systems-based approaches in chemistry and biology research. =20 A systems approach to science aims to study complex networks rather than isolated entities. This goal of this symposium is to review recent developments in systems chemical biology, systems biology and systems chemistry, and examine links between them. =20 In systems biology large networks describing the regulation of entire genomes, metabolic pathways and signal transduction pathways are analyzed in their totality at different levels of biological organization. The development of cheminformatics tools that can integrate chemical knowledge with this biological data has created an interest in systems chemical biology. Systems chemistry provides another new research area moving beyond single molecular entities to multi-component, multi-functional chemical systems to create new functions from molecular components at different hierarchical levels or via molecular networks with emergent properties. The development of these integrated systems-based approaches could improve our understanding of complex chemical and biological networks in areas as diverse as drug discovery and materials science. =20 Presentations will be 25-30 minutes, including time for questions. The deadline for submitting an abstract for consideration is October 17, 2011.=20 Abstracts may be submitted via: http://abstracts.acs.org. =20 Please contact the co-organizers if you have any questions or to discuss a paper. =20 Thank you, Tudor Oprea and Jan Kuras =20 ______________________ Tudor Oprea Professor Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, UNM School of Medicine = (toprea::salud.unm.edu)=20 Guest Professor, Systems Biology, DTU Center for Biological Sequence = Analysis (tuop::cbs.dtu.dk)=20 and ______________________ Jan Kuras Chemistry Central 236 Gray's Inn Road London WC1X 8HB, UK www.chemistrycentral.com=20 =20 =20 =20 =20 Tudor I. Oprea, MD PhD Professor and Chief, Division of Biocomputing Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology MSC11 6145 University of New Mexico School of Medicine Albuquerque, NM 87131, USA =20 Division Website: http://hsc.unm.edu/som/biocomputing/=20 Vox: (505) 272-3694 Fax: (505) 272-0238 Email: toprea::salud.unm.edu =20 Professor, Department of Systems Biology Center for Biological Sequence Analysis Technical University of Denmark Email: tuop::cbs.dtu.dk=20 CBS Website: http://www.cbs.dtu.dk/index.shtml =20 Company Website: http://www.sunsetmolecular.com=20 =20 Researcher ID link: http://www.researcherid.com/rid/A-5746-2011=20 =20 Address for Rapid Delivery Services: Research Incubator Building--Suite 190 2703 Frontier NE Albuquerque, NM 87131-0001 --=__PartD2FD063B.1__= Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Description: HTML
DEADLINE Oct 31, but please notify us if you plan to submit = an abstract.
 
 
 
Call for papers
Session title: Systems chemical biology and other = "systems" approaches
in chemistry and biology research 243rd ACS = National Meeting, San Diego,
California, March 25-29, 2012 CINF = Division
 
We are accepting submission of abstracts for consideration for an = ACS
Division of Chemical Information (CINF) Symposium on systems-basedapproaches in chemistry and biology research.
 
A systems approach to science aims to study complex networks rather = than
isolated entities.  This goal of this symposium is to review = recent
developments in systems chemical biology, systems biology and = systems
chemistry, and examine links between them.
 
In systems biology large networks describing the regulation of = entire
genomes, metabolic pathways and signal transduction pathways = are
analyzed in their totality at different levels of biological
orga= nization.  The development of cheminformatics tools that can
integr= ate chemical knowledge with this biological data has created an
interest= in systems chemical biology.  Systems chemistry provides
another = new research area moving beyond single molecular entities to
multi-compo= nent, multi-functional chemical systems to create new
functions from = molecular components at different hierarchical levels or
via molecular = networks with emergent properties.  The development of
these = integrated systems-based approaches could improve our
understanding of = complex chemical and biological networks in areas as
diverse as drug = discovery and materials science.
 
Presentations will be 25-30 minutes, including time for questions. = The
deadline for submitting an abstract for consideration is October = 17,
2011.
Abstracts may be submitted via: http://abstracts.acs.org.
 
Please contact the co-organizers if you have any questions or to = discuss
a paper.
 
Thank you,
Tudor Oprea and Jan Kuras
 
______________________
Tudor Oprea
Professor Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, UNM School of Medicine = (toprea::salud.unm.edu)
Guest Professor, Systems Biology, DTU Center for Biological Sequence = Analysis (tuop::cbs.dtu.dk) =
and
______________________
Jan Kuras
Chemistry Central
236 = Gray's Inn Road
London WC1X 8HB, UK
www.chemistrycentral.com
 
 
 
 
Tudor I. Oprea, MD PhD
Professor = and Chief, Division of Biocomputing
Department of Biochemistry and = Molecular Biology
MSC11 6145
University of New Mexico School of = Medicine
Albuquerque, NM 87131, USA
 
Division Website: = http://hsc.unm.edu/som/biocomputing/
Vox: (505) 272-3694
Fax: (505) 272-0238
= Email:
toprea::salud.unm.edu
 

Professor, Department of = Systems Biology
Center for Biological Sequence Analysis
Technica= l University of Denmark
Email:
tuop::cbs.dtu.dk
CBS Website:
http://www.cbs.dt= u.dk/index.shtml
 
Company Website: = http://www.sunsetmolecular.com
 
 
Address for Rapid Delivery = Services:
Research Incubator Building--Suite 190
2703 Frontier = NE
Albuquerque, NM 87131-0001
--=__PartD2FD063B.1__=-- --=__PartD2FD063B.0__=--