Determining protein structures by combining semireliable data with atomistic physical models by Bayesian inference
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
More than 100,000 protein structures are now known at atomic detail. However, far more are not yet known, particularly among large or complex proteins. Often, experimental information is only semireliable because it is uncertain, limited, or confusing in important ways. Some experiments give sparse information, some give ambiguous or nonspecific information, and others give uncertain information-where some is right, some is wrong, but we don't know which. We describe a method called Modeling Employing Limited Data (MELD) that can harness such problematic information in a physics-based, Bayesian framework for improved structure determination. We apply MELD to eight proteins of known structure for which such problematic structural data are available, including a sparse NMR dataset, two ambiguous EPR datasets, and four uncertain datasets taken from sequence evolution data. MELD gives excellent structures, indicating its promise for experimental biomolecule structure determination where only semireliable data are available.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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