MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987547168 · doi:10.1063/1.1522373

Exploring the energy landscape of proteins: A characterization of the activation-relaxation technique

2002· article· en· W1987547168 on OpenAlexaff
Guanghong Wei, Normand Mousseau, Philippe Derreumaux

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtein Structure and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnergy landscapeMaxima and minimaEnergy (signal processing)BiomoleculeRelaxation (psychology)Range (aeronautics)Representation (politics)Statistical physicsComputer scienceBiological systemChemistryPhysicsMathematicsNanotechnologyMaterials scienceStatisticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Finding the global energy minimum region of a polypeptide chain, independently of the starting conformation and in a reasonable computational time, is of fundamental interest. As the energy landscape of proteins is very rugged, sampling is hindered by the vast number of minima existing on this multidimensional landscape. In this study, we use activation-relaxation technique (ART) to explore the energy landscape of a series of peptide models with 14, 26, and 28 amino acids. Peptides are modeled by a reduced off-lattice representation and a simplified OPEP-like (optimized potential for efficient peptide-structure prediction) energy model. ART defines moves directly in the energy landscape and can generate with equal efficiency events with root-mean-square deviation as small as 0.1 or as large as 4 Å. Our results show that (i) ART trajectories are reversible and provide real activated paths; (ii) ART simulations converge to the same low-energy minimum region, for a wide range of starting configurations; (iii) ART method can sample the phase space effectively, going through many hyper-basins, and can generate significant moves in a single event. Possible applications of ART method to biomolecules are discussed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.187 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations49
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicProtein Structure and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207