MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of External Electric Field Upon Selected Proteogenic Amino Acids

2013· article· en· W1481150017 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Józef Mazurkiewicz, Piotr Tomasik

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in natural science/Advances in natural sciences · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsoleucineAmino acidValineAlanineMethionineGlycineLeucineCysteineArginineChemistryTryptophanGlutamic acidSerineMoleculeTyrosineStereochemistryCrystallographyBiochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effect of external electric field (EEF) of 0.001, 0.005 and 0.01 a.u. upon molecular energy, charge distribution and dipole moments of non-dissociated and inner salt forms of alanine (Ala), arginine (Arg), aspartic acid Asp), cysteine (Cys), glutamic acid (Gln), glycine (Gly), isoleucine (Ile), leucine (Leu), lysine (Lys), methionine (Met), ornithine (Orn), proline (Pro), serine (Ser), threonine (Thr), tryptophan (Trp), tyrosine (Tyr), and valine (Val) were studied. For that purpose HyperChem 8.0 software was used together with the AM1 method for optimization of the conformation of the molecules in a computer vacuum. Based on the effect of EEF upon the charge density localized at the nitrogen atom of the α-amino group the acids were divided into two groups. They were Group I in which EEF increased the negative charge (Ala, Gly, Ile, Leu, Lys, Met, Phe, Pro, and Thr) and Group II in which EEF induced opposite effect (Cys, Ser, Tyr and Val). Generally, an increase in the EEF strength declined energy and increased dipole moments in non-ionized amino acids and in their inner salt forms. Energy of non-dissociated forms was more negative than these of corresponding zwitterions. Orientation of the molecules in EEF strongly depended on the EEF strength.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.015
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.007
Open science0.0040.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.327 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in natural science/Advances in natural sciencesSame topicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics researchFrench-language works237,207