Correlation Between Protein Sequence Similarity and X-Ray Diffraction Quality in the Protein Data Bank
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
As the most widely utilized technique to determine the 3-dimensional structure of protein molecules, X-ray crystallography can provide structure of the highest resolution among the developed techniques. The resolution obtained via X-ray crystallography is known to be influenced by many factors, such as the crystal quality, diffraction techniques, and X-ray sources, etc. In this paper, the authors found that the protein sequence could also be one of the factors. We extracted information of the resolution and the sequence of proteins from the Protein Data Bank (PDB), classified the proteins into different clusters according to the sequence similarity, and statistically analyzed the relationship between the sequence similarity and the best resolution obtained. The results showed that there was a pronounced correlation between the sequence similarity and the obtained resolution. These results indicate that protein structure itself is one variable that may affect resolution when X-ray crystallography is used.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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