Reconstructing folding energy landscapes from splitting probability analysis of single-molecule trajectories
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Structural self-assembly in biopolymers, such as proteins and nucleic acids, involves a diffusive search for the minimum-energy state in a conformational free-energy landscape. The likelihood of folding proceeding to completion, as a function of the reaction coordinate used to monitor the transition, can be described by the splitting probability, p(fold)(x). P(fold) encodes information about the underlying energy landscape, and it is often used to judge the quality of the reaction coordinate. Here, we show how p(fold) can be used to reconstruct energy landscapes from single-molecule folding trajectories, using force spectroscopy measurements of single DNA hairpins. Calculating p(fold)(x) directly from trajectories of the molecular extension measured for hairpins fluctuating in equilibrium between folded and unfolded states, we inverted the result expected from diffusion over a 1D energy landscape to obtain the implied landscape profile. The results agreed well with the landscapes reconstructed by established methods, but, remarkably, without the need to deconvolve instrumental effects on the landscape, such as tether compliance. The same approach was also applied to hairpins with multistate folding pathways. The relative insensitivity of the method to the instrumental compliance was confirmed by simulations of folding measured with different tether stiffnesses. This work confirms that the molecular extension is a good reaction coordinate for these measurements, and validates a powerful yet simple method for reconstructing landscapes from single-molecule trajectories.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".