Mapping Allostery through Equilibrium Perturbation NMR Spectroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The understanding of allostery relies on the comparative analysis of macromolecules in their free and bound states. However, the direct free versus bound comparison is often challenging due to the instability of one of the two forms. This problem is effectively circumvented by using minor free/bound equilibrium perturbations which are tolerated without compromising sample stability. The subtle equilibrium perturbations are still able to reveal significant apo/holo differences if monitored by NMR experiments that are sensitive to minor populations within dynamic equilibria, such as NMR relaxation dispersion (NMRD) and hydrogen exchange (H/D and H/H) rates. These measurements are complementary to each other as they unmask how a ligand affects both the stable and the excited states of the free energy landscape for its protein receptor. The proposed equilibrium perturbation approach therefore significantly expands the scope of applicability of NMRD and hydrogen exchange experiments to the investigation of ligand-protein interactions, in general, unveiling allosteric "hot spot" maps for systems that have been traditionally elusive to direct free/bound comparisons.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".