Efficient chain moves for Monte Carlo simulations of a wormlike DNA model: Excluded volume, supercoils, site juxtapositions, knots, and comparisons with random-flight and lattice models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We develop two classes of Monte Carlo moves for efficient sampling of wormlike DNA chains that can have significant degrees of supercoiling, a conformational feature that is key to many aspects of biological function including replication, transcription, and recombination. One class of moves entails reversing the coordinates of a segment of the chain along one, two, or three axes of an appropriately chosen local frame of reference. These transformations may be viewed as a generalization, to the continuum, of the Madras-Orlitsky-Shepp algorithm for cubic lattices. Another class of moves, termed T+/-2, allows for interconversions between chains with different lengths by adding or subtracting two beads (monomer units) to or from the chain. Length-changing moves are generally useful for conformational sampling with a given site juxtaposition, as has been shown in previous lattice studies. Here, the continuum T+/-2 moves are designed to enhance their acceptance rate in supercoiled conformations. We apply these moves to a wormlike model in which excluded volume is accounted for by a bond-bond repulsion term. The computed autocorrelation functions for the relaxation of bond length, bond angle, writhe, and branch number indicate that the new moves lead to significantly more efficient sampling than conventional bead displacements and crankshaft rotations. A close correspondence is found in the equilibrium ensemble between the map of writhe computed for pair of chain segments and the map of site juxtapositions or self-contacts. To evaluate the more coarse-grained freely jointed chain (random-flight) and cubic lattice models that are commonly used in DNA investigations, twisting (torsional) potentials are introduced into these models. Conformational properties for a given superhelical density sigma may then be sampled by computing the writhe and using White's formula to relate the degree of twisting to writhe and sigma. Extensive comparisons of contact patterns and knot probabilities of the more coarse-grained models with the wormlike model show that the behaviors of the random-flight model are similar to that of DNA molecules in a solution environment with high ionic strengths, whereas the behaviors of the cubic lattice model with excluded volume are akin to that of DNA molecules under low ionic strengths.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".