MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001722542 · doi:10.1039/c3cp44564j

Single-molecule assays for investigating protein misfolding and aggregation

2013· article· en· W2001722542 on OpenAlexafffund
Armin Hoffmann, Krishna Neupane, Michael T. Woodside

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Chemistry Chemical Physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicForce Microscopy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsNational Institute for NanotechnologyUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsProtein aggregationComputational biologyProtein foldingNanotechnologyChemistrySmall moleculeComputer scienceBiophysicsBiologyMaterials scienceBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Protein misfolding and aggregation are relevant to many fields. Recently, their investigation has experienced a revival as a central topic in the research of numerous human diseases, including Parkinson's and Alzheimer's. Much has been learned from ensemble biochemical approaches, but the inherently heterogeneous nature of the underlying processes has obscured many important details. Single-molecule techniques offer unique capabilities to study heterogeneous systems, while providing high temporal and structural resolution to characterize them. In this Perspective, we give an overview of the single-molecule assays that have been applied to protein misfolding and aggregation, which are mainly based on fluorescence and force spectroscopy. We describe some of the technical challenges involved in studying aggregation at the single-molecule level and discuss what has been learned about aggregation mechanisms from the different approaches.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations33
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Chemistry Chemical PhysicsSame topicForce Microscopy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207