MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028909116 · doi:10.1073/pnas.0406948102

α-Helix formation in a photoswitchable peptide tracked from picoseconds to microseconds by time-resolved IR spectroscopy

2005· article· en· W2028909116 on OpenAlexaff
Jens Bredenbeck, Jan Helbing, Janet R. Kumita, G. Andrew Woolley, Peter Hamm

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMicrosecondChemistryKineticsPicosecondHelix (gastropod)Folding (DSP implementation)PeptideSpectroscopyCrystallographyTemperature jumpProtein foldingChemical physicsPhysical chemistryOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photo-triggered alpha-helix formation of a 16-residue peptide featuring a built-in conformational photoswitch is monitored by time-resolved IR spectroscopy. An experimental approach with 2-ps time resolution and a scanning range up to 30 micros is used to cover all time scales of the peptide dynamics. Experiments are carried out at different temperatures between 281 and 322 K. We observe single-exponential kinetics of the amide I' band at 322 K on a time scale comparable to a recent temperature-jump folding experiment. When lowering the temperature, the kinetics become slower and nonexponential. The transition is strongly activated. Spectrally dispersed IR measurements provide multiple spectroscopic probes simultaneously in one experiment by resolving the amide I' band, isotope-labeled amino acid residues, and side chains. We find differing relaxation dynamics at different spectral positions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.000
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
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

Citations189
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics researchFrench-language works237,207