MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063249983 · doi:10.1287/ijoc.2014.0596

Efficient Use of Semidefinite Programming for Selection of Rotamers in Protein Conformations

2014· article· en· W2063249983 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueINFORMS journal on computing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Interference and Gene Delivery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSemidefinite embeddingSemidefinite programmingRoundingRelaxation (psychology)Reduction (mathematics)Mathematical optimizationComputer scienceCutting-plane methodConstraint (computer-aided design)Constraint programmingTheory of computationMathematicsAlgorithmInteger programmingQuadratically constrained quadratic programStochastic programmingQuadratic programming

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Determination of a protein's structure can facilitate an understanding of how the structure changes when that protein combines with other proteins or smaller molecules. In this paper we study a semidefinite programming (SDP) relaxation of the (NP-hard) side chain positioning problem presented in Chazelle et al [Chazelle B, Kingsford C, Singh M (2004) A semidefinite programming approach to side chain positioning with new rounding strategies. INFORMS J. Comput. 16:380-392]. We show that the Slater constraint qualification (strict feasibility) fails for the SDP relaxation. We then show the advantages of using facial reduction to regularize the SDP. In fact, after applying facial reduction, we have a smaller problem that is more stable both in theory and in practice. We include cutting planes to improve the rounded SDP approximate solutions.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.339
Threshold uncertainty score0.234

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.243 · 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