MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005109922 · doi:10.1002/jcc.21129

Comparison of predicted native structures of Met‐enkephalin based on various accessible‐surface‐area solvent models

2008· article· en· W2005109922 on OpenAlexaff
Lixin Zhan, Jeff Z. Y. Chen, Wing‐Ki Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Chemistry · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtein Structure and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolventSimilarity (geometry)Monte Carlo methodSurface (topology)Accessible surface areaSurface proteinComputational Science and EngineeringStatistical physicsChemistryComputer scienceMathematicsComputational chemistryPhysicsGeometryApplied mathematicsStatisticsArtificial intelligenceBiologyOrganic chemistryImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine the variation and similarity of the native structures predicted from various accessible-surface-area solvent models for peptide Met-enkephalin. Both ECEPP/2 and ECEPP/3 force fields have been used in conjunction with ten different sets of accessible-surface-area parameterization. The native structures were determined by an implementation of the basin hopping Monte Carlo technique. The results suggest that the implicit solvent models examined in this study should be employed in computer simulations with extreme caution. In addition, the effect of fixing or not fixing the peptide angles omega has been examined. We conclude that fixing omega generally gives rise to a poor prediction.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational ChemistrySame topicProtein Structure and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207