MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102663456 · doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2011.09.008

Tilt-Pair Analysis of Images from a Range of Different Specimens in Single-Particle Electron Cryomicroscopy

2011· article· en· W2102663456 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

VenueJournal of Molecular Biology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced Electron Microscopy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTilt (camera)Orientation (vector space)Particle (ecology)Resolution (logic)Range (aeronautics)Cryo-electron microscopySingle particle analysisElectron microscopeMaterials scienceOpticsElectronComputational physicsMolecular physicsPhysicsNuclear magnetic resonanceGeometryArtificial intelligenceMathematicsComputer scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The comparison of a pair of electron microscope images recorded at different specimen tilt angles provides a powerful approach for evaluating the quality of images, image-processing procedures, or three-dimensional structures. Here, we analyze tilt-pair images recorded from a range of specimens with different symmetries and molecular masses and show how the analysis can produce valuable information not easily obtained otherwise. We show that the accuracy of orientation determination of individual single particles depends on molecular mass, as expected theoretically since the information in each particle image increases with molecular mass. The angular uncertainty is less than 1° for particles of high molecular mass (~50 MDa), several degrees for particles in the range 1-5 MDa, and tens of degrees for particles below 1 MDa. Orientational uncertainty may be the major contributor to the effective temperature factor (B-factor) describing contrast loss and therefore the maximum resolution of a structure determination. We also made two unexpected observations. Single particles that are known to be flexible showed a wider spread in orientation accuracy, and the orientations of the largest particles examined changed by several degrees during typical low-dose exposures. Smaller particles presumably also reorient during the exposure; hence, specimen movement is a second major factor that limits resolution. Tilt pairs thus enable assessment of orientation accuracy, map quality, specimen motion, and conformational heterogeneity. A convincing tilt-pair parameter plot, where 60% of the particles show a single cluster around the expected tilt axis and tilt angle, provides confidence in a structure determined using electron cryomicroscopy.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.297 · 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