Abstract
We explore two significant factors on the outcomes of benchmark studies for
enzymatically catalysed reactions, namely the level of theory of the benchmarks and
the size of the model system used to represent the enzyme active site. For the
benchmarks, we compare two potential alternatives to canonical coupled cluster
results for situations where CCSD(T) is computationally too demanding: a strategy to
estimate finite basis set coupled cluster values and the local-correlation DLPNO-CCSD(T) method at the complete basis set limit. We confirm the high accuracy of
DLPNO-CCSD(T) used with tight thresholds. We also show that notable differences
can be seen when using both sets of references for a benchmark study, with absolute
deviations from the higher quality references generally smaller than those from lowerquality ones as well as changes in the ranking of the assessed methods. For
geometries, we test three models for the active site of 4-oxalocrotonate tautomerase:
one typical of the QM region that may be used in QM/MM studies, and two smaller
variants that neglect the surrounding chemical environment. Benchmarking of 12
density functionals known to perform well on enzymatically catalysed reactions shows
inconsistent performance of each method across the three models, contradicting the
common idea that small representative systems can be used to accurately assess the
applicability of low-level methods for larger biochemical applications. Our findings shall
serve as a reminder on the standards that should be adhered to in benchmark studies,
and as a guide for future studies, both on enzyme-related and other chemical problems.
Supplementary materials
Title
EnzymeBenchmarkingGuide SI Part1
Description
Actions
Title
EnzymeBenchmarkingGuide SI Part2 4-OT models
Description
Actions