MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2418193113 · doi:10.1002/bip.22884

On‐resin <i>N</i>‐terminal peptoid degradation: Toward mild sequencing conditions

2016· article· en· W2418193113 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Caroline Proulx, Falko Noë, Stan Yoo, Michael D. Connolly, Ronald N. Zuckermann

Bibliographic record

VenueBiopolymers · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicChemical Synthesis and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDefense Threat Reduction Agency
KeywordsPeptoidChemistrySide chainHydrolysisResidue (chemistry)Intramolecular forceCationic polymerizationNucleophileBromideDegradation (telecommunications)Combinatorial chemistryStereochemistryPolymer chemistryMedicinal chemistryPeptideOrganic chemistryPolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel approach to sequentially degrade peptoid N-terminal N-(substituted)glycine residues on the solid-phase using very mild conditions is reported. This method relies on the treatment of resin-bound, bromoacetylated peptoids with silver perchlorate in THF, leading to an intramolecular cyclization reaction to liberate the terminal residue as a N-substituted morpholine-2,5-dione, resulting in a truncated peptoid upon hydrolysis and a silver bromide byproduct. Side-chain functional group tolerance is explored and reaction kinetics are determined. In a series of pentapeptoids possessing variable, non-nucleophilic side-chains at the second position (R(2) ), we demonstrate that sequential N-terminal degradation of the first two residues proceeds in 87% and 74% conversions on average, respectively. We further demonstrate that the degradation reaction is selective for peptoids, and represents substantial progress toward a mild, iterative sequencing method for peptoid oligomers. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Biopolymers (Pept Sci) 106: 726-736, 2016.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.474

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiopolymersSame topicChemical Synthesis and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207