Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: The problem of finding folding nuclei (a set of native contacts that play an important role in folding) along with identifying folding pathways (a time-ordered sequence of folding events) of proteins is one of the most important problems in protein chemistry. Here we propose a novel and simple approach to address this problem as follows: given the topology of the native state, identify native contacts that form folding nuclei based on a graph-theoretical approach that considers effective contact order (effective loop closure) as its objective function. MOTIVATION: A number of computational methods for the prediction of folding nuclei already exists in the literature, but most of them rely on restrictive assumptions about the nature of nuclei or the process of folding. Our motivation is to develop a simple, efficient and robust algorithm to find an ensemble of pathways with the lowest effective contact order and to identify contacts that are crucial for folding. RESULTS: Our approach is different from the previously used methods in that it uses efficient graph algorithms and does not formulate restrictive assumptions about folding nuclei. Our predictions provide more details concerning the protein folding pathway than most other methods in the literature. We demonstrate the success of our approach by predicting folding nuclei for a dataset of proteins for which experimental kinetic data is available. We show that our method compares favourably with other methods in the literature and that its results agree with experimental results. AVAILABILITY: The executable for the proposed algorithm is available at http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~/foldingnuclei.html
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".