Multiscale modeling of emergent materials: biological and soft matter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this review, we focus on four current related issues in multiscale modeling of soft and biological matter. First, we discuss how to use structural information from detailed models (or experiments) to construct coarse-grained ones in a hierarchical and systematic way. This is discussed in the context of the so-called Henderson theorem and the inverse Monte Carlo method of Lyubartsev and Laaksonen. In the second part, we take a different look at coarse graining by analyzing conformations of molecules. This is done by the application of self-organizing maps, i.e., a neural network type approach. Such an approach can be used to guide the selection of the relevant degrees of freedom. Then, we discuss technical issues related to the popular dissipative particle dynamics (DPD) method. Importantly, the potentials derived using the inverse Monte Carlo method can be used together with the DPD thermostat. In the final part we focus on solvent-free modeling which offers a different route to coarse graining by integrating out the degrees of freedom associated with solvent.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".