Molecular Dynamics Simulation Study of Adsorption and Patterning of DNA Bases on the Au(111) Surface
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To understand of the mechanism of self-assembly of DNA base molecules on the Au(111) surface, molecular dynamics simulations of different surface coverage of guanine, adenine, cytosine, and thymine molecules at 300 and 400 K are performed. At low coverage, guanine, adenine, and thymine form hydrogen bonded chains on the surface, while cytosine molecules cluster into islands. At larger coverage, simulations indicate that adenine molecules form ordered two-dimensional hexagonal structures, while guanine, cytosine, and thymine molecules aggregate into small random clusters. These observations agree with scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) experiments of the DNA bases on gold surfaces. The simulations show that arrangement of the molecules on the gold surface is controlled by base–base interactions. The hydrogen bond interactions and stability of base–base homopairs, which are the smallest components of the self-assembled structures on the Au(111) surface, are calculated and compared with calculations of the homopairs in the gas phase and with values available in the literature. The binding energies per base on the surface initially decrease in magnitude with increasing surface coverage and then reach a constant plateau at large coverages. The mechanisms of molecular mobility for the bases with one and two molecule coverage on the surface are analyzed at two temperatures.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".