Biased motion and molecular motor properties of bipedal spiders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Molecular spiders are synthetic molecular motors featuring multiple legs that each can interact with a substrate through binding and cleavage. Experimental studies suggest the motion of the spider in a matrix is biased toward uncleaved substrates and that spider properties such as processivity can be altered by changing the binding strength of the legs to substrate [R. Pei, S. K. Taylor, D. Stefanovic, S. Rudchenko, T. E. Mitchell, and M. N. Stojanovic, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 128, 12693 (2006)]. We investigate the origin of biased motion and molecular motor properties of bipedal spiders using Monte Carlo simulations. Our simulations combine a realistic chemical kinetic model, hand-over-hand or inchworm modes of stepping, and the use of a one-dimensional track. We find that stronger binding to substrate, cleavage and spider detachment from the track are contributing mechanisms to population bias. We investigate the contributions of stepping mechanism to speed, randomness parameter, processivity, coupling, and efficiency, and comment on how these molecular motor properties can be altered by changing experimentally tunable kinetic parameters.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".