Conformational Studies of Methyl β-<scp>d</scp>-Arabinofuranoside Using the AMBER/GLYCAM Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Furanosides are important constituents of a number of glycoconjugates from many microorganisms. The highly flexible nature of these furanosyl moieties is believed to contribute significantly to their role in biological processes. Therefore, an understanding of the conformational preferences of these molecules is an important area of research. As part of a larger program involved in the conformational analysis of mycobacterial oligofuranosides, molecular dynamics simulations on methyl β-d-arabinofuranoside (3) have been carried out using the AMBER forcefield and the GLYCAM carbohydrate parameter set. This approach was used to predict the rotamer population distribution about the hydroxymethyl group (C4-C5 bond) as well as the ring puckering of this flexible ring system. Comparison of the conformer distributions obtained during the simulation of 3 using the TIP3P water model with those obtained by analysis of (1)H-(1)H coupling constant data indicated that this water model was insufficient to describe the solvation of this system. However, the use of the TIP4P and TIP5P models led to improved agreement with conformer populations obtained from NMR data.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".