Activation processes in ligand‐activated G protein‐coupled receptors: A case study of the adenosine A<sub>2A</sub> receptor
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Here we review concepts related to an ensemble description of G‐protein‐coupled receptors (GPCRs). The ensemble is characterized by both inactive and active states, whose equilibrium populations and exchange rates depend sensitively on ligand, environment, and allosteric factors. This review focuses on the adenosine A 2 receptor (A 2A R), a prototypical class A GPCR. 19 F Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) studies show that apo A 2A R is characterized by a broad ensemble of conformers, spanning inactive to active states, and resembling states defined earlier for rhodopsin. In keeping with ideas associated with a conformational selection mechanism, addition of agonist serves to allosterically restrict the overall degrees of freedom at the G protein binding interface and bias both states and functional dynamics to facilitate G protein binding and subsequent activation. While the ligand does not necessarily “induce” activation, it does bias sampling of states, increase the cooperativity of the activation process and thus, the lifetimes of functional activation intermediates, while restricting conformational dynamics to that needed for activation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it