Molecular Structures of Fluid Phosphatidylethanolamine Bilayers Obtained from Simulation-to-Experiment Comparisons and Experimental Scattering Density Profiles
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
Following our previous efforts in determining the structures of commonly used PC, PG, and PS bilayers, we continue our studies of fully hydrated, fluid phase PE bilayers. The newly designed parsing scheme for PE bilayers was based on extensive MD simulations, and is utilized in the SDP analysis of both X-ray and neutron (contrast varied) scattering measurements. Obtained experimental scattering form factors are directly compared to our simulation results, and can serve as a benchmark for future developed force fields. Among the evaluated structural parameters, namely, area per lipid A, overall bilayer thickness DB, and hydrocarbon region thickness 2DC, the PE bilayer response to changing temperature is similar to previously studied bilayers with different headgroups. On the other hand, the reduced hydration of PE headgroups, as well as the strong hydrogen bonding between PE headgroups, dramatically affects lateral packing within the bilayer. Despite sharing the same glycerol backbone, a markedly smaller area per lipid distinguishes PE from other bilayers (i.e., PC, PG, and PS) studied to date. Overall, our data are consistent with the notion that lipid headgroups govern bilayer packing, while hydrocarbon chains dominate the bilayer's response to temperature changes.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it