Using ellipsoids to model charge distributions in gas phase protein complex ion dissociation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gas phase protein complex dissociation was modelled using ellipsoids on which discrete charges were placed in randomly chosen charge sites. A number of sizes, shapes, orientations, and types of ellipsoids were considered. For each case, charge transfer parameters and electrostatic energies were calculated as a function of the fractional surface area. It was found that to within 1015%, the charge on product ions after dissociation is distributed according to their fractional surface area. This can imply, for example, that in experiments measuring the dissociation of homodimers, charge asymmetries of greater than 1015% in the product ions signal that one of the ions has greatly increased its surface area, such as would occur with unfolding. This assumes that proton transfer occurs on a timescale fast enough that the dissociation products adopt the minimum electrostatic energy configuration. Calculation of this energy shows that it is minimized when one or more of the monomers is in an extended conformation.Key words: protein complex dissociation, ellipsoid charge model, charge asymmetry.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".