MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966487136 · doi:10.1139/o09-187

Charge, hydrophobicity, and confined water: putting past simulations into a simple theoretical frameworkThis paper is one of a selection of papers published in this special issue entitled “Canadian Society of Biochemistry, Molecular & Cellular Biology 52nd Annual Meeting — Protein Folding: Principles and Diseases” and has undergone the Journal's usual peer review process.

2010· article· en· W1966487136 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jeremy L. England, Vijay S. Pande

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemistry and Cell Biology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtein Structure and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Eye Institute
KeywordsSimple (philosophy)Context (archaeology)Folding (DSP implementation)Charge (physics)Protein foldingMolecular dynamicsWater modelStatistical physicsChemical physicsSelection (genetic algorithm)NanotechnologyProcess (computing)ChemistryComputer sciencePhysicsComputational chemistryMaterials scienceBiologyEngineeringArtificial intelligenceEpistemologyMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water permeates all life, and mediates forces that are essential to the process of macromolecular self-assembly. Predicting these forces in a given biological context is challenging, since water organizes itself differently next to charged and hydrophobic surfaces, both of which are typically at play on the nanoscale in vivo. In this work, we present a simple statistical mechanical model for the forces water mediates between different confining surfaces, and demonstrate that the model qualitatively unifies a wide range of phenomena known in the simulation literature, including several cases of protein folding under confinement.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Theoretical or conceptuallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Theoretical or conceptualmedium
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations12
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemistry and Cell BiologySame topicProtein Structure and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207