MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2322004849 · doi:10.2316/j.2010.210-1025

DISCRETE APPROACHES FOR SOLVING MOLECULAR DISTANCE GEOMETRY PROBLEMS USING NMR DATA

2010· article· en· W2322004849 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carlile Lavor, Antonio Mucherino, Leo Liberti, Nelson Maculan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Computational Bioscience · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNMR spectroscopy and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsGeometryComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The molecular distance geometry problem (MDGP) is the problem of finding the conformation of a molecule by exploiting known distances between some pairs of its atoms.Estimates of the distances between the atoms can be obtained through experiments of nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy.The information on the distances, however, is usually limited, because only distances between hydrogens and shorter than 6 Å are usually available, and this makes the solution of the MDGP quite hard.In this paper, we focus our attention on protein backbones and we present a methodology for computing their full-atom conformations starting from NMR data.This task is performed by solving two MDGPs.First of all, only hydrogens are considered: we define an artificial backbone of hydrogens for which particular assumptions needed for the discretization of the problem are satisfied.This allows for solving the first MDGP with an ad hoc algorithm.Secondly, by exploiting the coordinates of the hydrogens and known bond lengths and bond angles, we compute the coordinates of the other atoms forming the protein backbone by using a polynomial-time algorithm.Computational experiments related to real proteins are presented.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations14
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Computational BioscienceSame topicNMR spectroscopy and applicationsFrench-language works237,207