Sequence-Specific Retention Calculator. A Family of Peptide Retention Time Prediction Algorithms in Reversed-Phase HPLC: Applicability to Various Chromatographic Conditions and Columns
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Separation selectivity of C18 reversed-phase columns from different manufacturers has been compared to evaluate the applicability of our sequence-specific retention calculator (SSRCalc) peptide retention prediction algorithms. Three different versions of SSRCalc are currently in use: 300-A pore size sorbents (TFA as ion-pairing modifier, pH 2), 100 A (TFA, pH 2), and 100 A (pH 10), which have been applied for the separation of randomly chosen mixture of tryptic peptides. The major factor affecting separation selectivity of C18 sorbents was found to be apparent pore size, while differences in end-capping chemistry do not introduce a significant impact. The introduction of embedded polar groups to the C18 functionality increases the retention of peptides containing hydrophobic amino acid residues with polar groups: Tyr and Trp. We also demonstrate that changing the ion-pairing modifier to formic/acetic acid significantly reduces the algorithm's predictive ability, so models developed for different eluent conditions cannot be compared directly to each other.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it