MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000997872 · doi:10.1115/detc2008-49600

A Continuous Model for Protein Synthesis Using Artificial Power Law in Topology Optimization

2008· article· en· W2000997872 on OpenAlexaff
Sung K. Koh, Gunagjun Liu, Wen-Hong Zhu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTopology Optimization in Engineering
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTopology optimizationComputer scienceProtein designSequence (biology)Mathematical optimizationReplicaTopology (electrical circuits)Optimal designAlgorithmMathematicsEngineeringProtein structure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A continuous protein synthesis formulation based on the design principles developed for structural topology optimization is proposed in this paper. Unlike conventional continuous protein design methods, the Power Law-based (PL) design formulation proposed in this paper enables using any number of residue types to accomplish the goal of protein synthesis and hence provides a continuous protein design formulation applicable to any general protein design problems. Moreover, a discrete sequence with minimum energy can be synthesized by the PL design method as it inherits the feature of material penalization used for the topology optimization. Since a continuous optimization method is implemented to solve the PL design formulation, the entire design process is more efficient and robust than the conventional design methods employing a stochastic or enumerative search process. The performance of the PL design formulation is demonstrated by designing simple lattice protein models for which an exhaustive search can be carried out to identify the sequence with minimum energy. The comparison with the exchange replica method indicates that the PL design method is millions of times more efficient than the conventional stochastic protein design method.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.629
Threshold uncertainty score0.654

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTopology Optimization in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207