MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992837242 · doi:10.1063/1.3244643

Interplay between writhe and knotting for swollen and compact polymers

2009· article· en· W1992837242 on OpenAlexaff
Marco Baiesi, Enzo Orlandini, S G Whittington

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicGeometric and Algebraic Topology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWritheKnot (papermaking)Simple cubic latticeMonte Carlo methodPolygon (computer graphics)ScalingTwistMathematicsLinking numberStatistical physicsTopology (electrical circuits)PhysicsGeometryCombinatoricsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The role of the topology and its relation with the geometry of biopolymers under different physical conditions is a nontrivial and interesting problem. Aiming at understanding this issue for a related simpler system, we use Monte Carlo methods to investigate the interplay between writhe and knotting of ring polymers in good and poor solvents. The model that we consider is interacting self-avoiding polygons on the simple cubic lattice. For polygons with fixed knot type, we find a writhe distribution whose average depends on the knot type but is insensitive to the length N of the polygon and to solvent conditions. This "topological contribution" to the writhe distribution has a value that is consistent with that of ideal knots. The standard deviation of the writhe increases approximately as square root(N) in both regimes, and this constitutes a geometrical contribution to the writhe. If the sum over all knot types is considered, the scaling of the standard deviation changes, for compact polygons, to approximately N(0.6). We argue that this difference between the two regimes can be ascribed to the topological contribution to the writhe that, for compact chains, overwhelms the geometrical one, thanks to the presence of a large population of complex knots at relatively small values of N. For polygons with fixed writhe, we find that the knot distribution depends on the chosen writhe, with the occurrence of achiral knots being considerably suppressed for large writhe. In general, the occurrence of a given knot thus depends on a nontrivial interplay between writhe, chain length, and solvent conditions.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.849
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 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

Citations23
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicGeometric and Algebraic TopologyFrench-language works237,207