MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058588130 · doi:10.4161/nucl.25432

A polymer model explains the complexity of large-scale chromatin folding

2013· article· en· W2058588130 on OpenAlexaff
Mariano Barbieri, James A. Fraser, Liron-Mark Lavitas, Mita Chotalia, Josée Dostie, Ana Pombo, Mario Nicodemi

Bibliographic record

VenueNucleus · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChromatinPolymer physicsFolding (DSP implementation)Chromosome conformation captureEpigeneticsComputational biologyBiophysicsHistonePhysicsPolymerBiologyBiological systemDNAGeneticsGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The underlying global organization of chromatin within the cell nucleus has been the focus of intense recent research. Hi-C methods have allowed for the detection of genome-wide chromatin interactions, revealing a complex large-scale organization where chromosomes tend to partition into megabase-sized "topological domains" of local chromatin interactions and intra-chromosomal contacts extends over much longer scales, in a cell-type and chromosome specific manner. Until recently, the distinct chromatin folding properties observed experimentally have been difficult to explain in a single conceptual framework. We reported that a simple polymer-physics model of chromatin, the strings and binders switch (SBS) model, succeeds in describing the full range of chromatin configurations observed in vivo. The SBS model simulates the interactions between randomly diffusing binding molecules and binding sites on a polymer chain. It explains how polymer architectural patterns can be established, how different stable conformations can be produced and how conformational changes can be reliably regulated by simple strategies, such as protein upregulation or epigenetic modifications, via fundamental thermodynamics mechanisms.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations35
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNucleusSame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207