Free energies of solvation in the context of protein folding: Implications for implicit and explicit solvent models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Implicit solvent models for biomolecular simulations have been developed to use in place of more expensive explicit models; however, these models make many assumptions and approximations that are likely to affect accuracy. Here, the changes in free energies of solvation upon folding ΔΔGsolv of several fast folding proteins are calculated from previously run μs-ms simulations with a number of implicit solvent models and compared to the values needed to be consistent with the explicit solvent model used in the simulations. In the majority of cases, there is a significant and substantial difference between the ΔΔGsolv values calculated from the two approaches that is robust to the details of the calculations. These differences could only be remedied by selecting values for the model parameters-the internal dielectric constant for the polar term and the surface tension coefficient for the nonpolar term-that were system-specific or physically unrealistic. We discuss the potential implications of our findings for both implicit and explicit solvent simulations. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".