Ring closure dynamics for a chemically active polymer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The principles that underlie the motion of colloidal particles in concentration gradients and the propulsion of chemically-powered synthetic nanomotors are used to design active polymer chains. The active chains contain catalytic and noncatalytic monomers, or beads, at the ends or elsewhere along the polymer chain. A chemical reaction at the catalytic bead produces a self-generated concentration gradient and the noncatalytic bead responds to this gradient by a diffusiophoretic mechanism that causes these two beads to move towards each other. Because of this chemotactic response, the dynamical properties of these active polymer chains are very different from their inactive counterparts. In particular, we show that ring closure and loop formation are much more rapid than those for inactive chains, which rely primarily on diffusion to bring distant portions of the chain in close proximity. The mechanism presented in this paper can be extended to other chemical systems which rely on diffusion to bring reagents into contact for reactions to occur. This study suggests the possibility that synthetic systems could make use of chemically-powered active motion or chemotaxis to effectively carry out complex transport tasks in reaction dynamics, much like those that molecular motors perform in biological systems.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".