Dimensionality-dependent crossover in motility of polyvalent burnt-bridges ratchets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The burnt-bridges ratchet (BBR) mechanism is a model for biased molecular motion whereby the construct destroys track binding sites as it progresses and therefore acts as a diffusing forager, seeking new substrate sites. Using Monte Carlo simulations that implement the Gillespie algorithm, we investigate the kinetic characteristics of simple polyvalent BBRs as they move on tracks of increasing width. We find that as the track width is increased the BBRs remain nearly ballistic for considerable track widths proportional to the span (leg length) of the polyvalent walker before transitioning to near-conventional diffusion on two-dimensional tracks. We find there exists a trade-off in BBR track association time and superdiffusivity in the BBR design parameter space of span, polyvalency, and track width. Furthermore, we develop an analytical model to describe the ensemble-average motion on the track and find it is in good agreement with our Gillespie simulation results. This work offers insights into design criteria for de novo BBRs and their associated tracks, where experimentalists seek to optimize directionality and track association time.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".