Determining RNA three-dimensional structures using low-resolution data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Knowing the 3-D structure of an RNA is fundamental to understand its biological function. Nowadays X-ray crystallography and NMR spectroscopy are systematically applied to newly discovered RNAs. However, the application of these high-resolution techniques is not always possible, and thus scientists must turn to lower resolution alternatives. Here, we introduce a pipeline to systematically generate atomic resolution 3-D structures that are consistent with low-resolution data sets. We compare and evaluate the discriminative power of a number of low-resolution experimental techniques to reproduce the structure of the Escherichia coli tRNA(VAL) and P4-P6 domain of the Tetrahymena thermophila group I intron. We test single and combinations of the most accessible low-resolution techniques, i.e. hydroxyl radical footprinting (OH), methidiumpropyl-EDTA (MPE), multiplexed hydroxyl radical cleavage (MOHCA), and small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS). We show that OH-derived constraints are accurate to discriminate structures at the atomic level, whereas EDTA-based constraints apply to global shape determination. We provide a guide for choosing which experimental techniques or combination of thereof is best in which context. The pipeline represents an important step towards high-throughput low-resolution RNA structure determination.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".