MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766851330 · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcb.7b10621

Allocating and Splitting Free Energy to Maximize Molecular Machine Flux

2018· article· en· W2766851330 on OpenAlexafffund
Aidan I. Brown, David A. Sivak

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry B · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
Topicstochastic dynamics and bifurcation
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersSimon Fraser UniversityNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsMetastabilityConstant (computer programming)Energy (signal processing)Non-equilibrium thermodynamicsStatistical physicsKinetic energyReaction rate constantEnergy landscapeFlux (metallurgy)Potential energyEnergy profilePhysicsChemical physicsThermodynamicsChemistryComputer scienceAtomic physicsClassical mechanicsQuantum mechanicsKinetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biomolecular machines transduce between different forms of energy. These machines make directed progress and increase their speed by consuming free energy, typically in the form of nonequilibrium chemical concentrations. Machine dynamics are often modeled by transitions between a set of discrete metastable conformational states. In general, the free-energy change associated with each transition can increase the forward rate constant, decrease the reverse rate constant, or both. In contrast to previous optimizations, we find that in general flux is maximized neither by devoting all free-energy changes to increasing forward rate constants nor by solely decreasing reverse rate constants. Instead, the optimal free-energy splitting depends on the detailed dynamics. Extending our analysis to machines with vulnerable states (from which they can break down), in the strong driving corresponding to in vivo cellular conditions, processivity is maximized by reducing the occupation of the vulnerable state.

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 score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations18
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry BSame topicstochastic dynamics and bifurcationFrench-language works237,207