Intelligent decision support for protein crystal growth
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current structural genomics projects are likely to produce hundreds of proteins a year for structural analysis. The primary goal of our research is to speed up the process of crystal growth for proteins in order to enable the determination of protein structure using single crystal X-ray diffraction. We describe Max, a working prototype that includes a high-throughput crystallization and evaluation setup in the wet laboratory and an intelligent software system in the computer laboratory. A robotic setup for crystal growth is able to prepare and evaluate over 40 thousand crystallization experiments a day. Images of the crystallization outcomes captured with a digital camera are processed by an image-analysis component that uses the two-dimensional Fourier transform to perform automated classification of the experiment outcome. An information repository component, which stores the data obtained from crystallization experiments, was designed with an emphasis on correctness, completeness, and reproducibility. A case-based reasoning component provides support for the design of crystal growth experiments by retrieving previous similar cases, and then adapting these in order to create a solution for the problem at hand. While work on Max is still in progress, we report here on the implementation status of its components, discuss how our work relates to other research, and describe our plans for the future.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it