MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319407006 · doi:10.1042/bst20120333

Crossing-sign discrimination and knot-reduction for a lattice model of strand passage

2013· review· en· W2319407006 on OpenAlexaff
Chris Soteros, Michael Szafron

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemical Society Transactions · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer therapeutics and mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKnot (papermaking)Polygon (computer graphics)Sign (mathematics)Lattice (music)MathematicsCombinatoricsTopoisomeraseMonte Carlo methodDNAPhysicsStatistical physicsComputer scienceBiologyGeneticsMathematical analysisStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By performing strand-passages on DNA, type II topoisomerases are known to resolve topological constraints that impede normal cellular functions. The full details of this enzyme-DNA interaction mechanism are, however, not completely understood. To better understand this mechanism, researchers have proposed and studied a variety of random polygon models of enzyme-induced strand-passage. In the present article, we review results from one such model having the feature that it is amenable to combinatorial and asymptotic analysis (as polygon length goes to infinity). The polygons studied, called Θ-SAPs, are on the simple-cubic lattice and contain a specific strand-passage structure, called Θ, at a fixed site. Another feature of this model is the availability of Monte Carlo methods that facilitate the estimation of crossing-sign-dependent knot-transition probabilities. From such estimates, it has been possible to investigate how knot-reduction depends on the crossing-sign and the local juxtaposition geometry at the strand-passage site. A strong relationship between knot-reduction and a crossing-sign-dependent crossing-angle has been observed for this model. In the present article, we review these results and present heuristic geometrical arguments to explain this crossing-sign and angle-dependence. Finally, we discuss potential implications for other models of type II topoisomerase action on DNA.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.797
Threshold uncertainty score0.947

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemical Society TransactionsSame topicCancer therapeutics and mechanismsFrench-language works237,207