An Improved Model for Prediction of Retention Times of Tryptic Peptides in Ion Pair Reversed-phase HPLC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The proposed model is based on the measurement of the retention times of 346 tryptic peptides in the 560- to 4,000-Da mass range, derived from a mixture of 17 protein digests. These peptides were measured in HPLC-MALDI MS runs, with peptide identities confirmed by MS/MS. The model relies on summation of the retention coefficients of the individual amino acids, as in previous approaches, but additional terms are introduced that depend on the retention coefficients for amino acids at the N-terminal of the peptide. In the 17-protein mixture, optimization of two sets of coefficients, along with additional compensation for peptide length and hydrophobicity, yielded a linear dependence of retention time on hydrophobicity, with an R2 value about 0.94. The predictive capability of the model was used to distinguish peptides with close m/z values and for detailed peptide mapping of selected proteins. Its applicability was tested on columns of different sizes, from nano- to narrow-bore, and for direct sample injection, or injection via a pre-column. It can be used for accurate prediction of retention times for tryptic peptides on reversed-phase (300-A pore size) columns of different sizes with a linear water-ACN gradient and with TFA as the ion-pairing modifier.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".