MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024755652 · doi:10.4161/pri.18665

Nanopore analysis

2012· review· en· W2024755652 on OpenAlexaff
Claudia Madampage, Omid Tavassoly, Chris Christensen, Meena Kumari, Jeremy S. Lee

Bibliographic record

VenuePrion · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanopore and Nanochannel Transport Studies
Canadian institutionsSaskatoon Medical ImagingUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNanoporeFolding (DSP implementation)BiophysicsMoleculeChemistryPeptideProtein foldingAmyloid (mycology)MembraneNanotechnologyBiochemistryMaterials scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nanopore analysis is an emerging technique that enables the investigation of the conformation of a single peptide or protein molecule. Briefly, a pore is inserted into a membrane under voltage clamp conditions. When a molecule interacts with the pore there is a change in the current, I, for a time, T. Small unfolded molecules can translocate the pore whereas folded or large molecules tend to simply bump into the pore and then diffuse away. Therefore, the parameters, I and T, are dependent on the conformation of the molecule at the instant at which it encounters the pore. Thus, multiple conformations can be detected simultaneously in a single sample. As well, the analysis can be performed under dilute conditions so that folding or dimerization of a peptide can be followed in real time, which is generally difficult to study for proteins that are prone to aggregate. In this report, we describe our initial analysis of (1) Aβ peptides, which are deposited as amyloid plaques in Alzheimer disease, (2) α-synuclein, which is implicated in Parkinson disease and (3) prion proteins whose misfolding is evident in transmissable spongiform encephalopathies. In each case conformational information can be obtained which may help in understanding the early steps in the misfolding pathways.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.228 · 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.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations55
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePrionSame topicNanopore and Nanochannel Transport StudiesFrench-language works237,207