<scp>N</scp>omenclature of homodetic cyclic peptides produced from ribosomal precursors: <scp>A</scp>n IUPAC task group interim report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2015, an International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) Task Group was formed to develop nomenclature recommendations for homodetic cyclic peptides produced from ribosomal precursors. Delegates of the 2015 International Conference on Circular Proteins (ICCP) were presented with the strengths and weaknesses of four published approaches to homodetic cyclic peptide nomenclature, and a summary of the ensuing discussion is presented here. This interim report presents a potentially novel suggestion-the use of Cahn-Ingold-Prelog rules to specify amino acid priority in homodetic peptides for consistent numbering. Indeed, this might be the first extension of the Cahn-Ingold-Prelog rules in five decades. The authors invite interested parties to contact the corresponding author with suggestions for the improvement of the proposed nomenclature; these ideas will be discussed and considered for inclusion in the final report.
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 | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.006 |
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".