MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2891833741 · doi:10.1063/1.5046692

Transition-path properties for folding reactions in the limit of small barriers

2018· article· en· W2891833741 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrew G. T. Pyo, Noel Q. Hoffer, Krishna Neupane, Michael T. Woodside

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA and Nucleic Acid Chemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta InnovatesAlberta Innovates - Technology FuturesJohn Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation
KeywordsLimit (mathematics)Work (physics)HarmonicStatistical physicsPath (computing)Folding (DSP implementation)DiffusionPhysicsChemistryChemical physicsComputer scienceThermodynamicsQuantum mechanicsMathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transition paths are of great interest because they encapsulate information about the mechanisms of barrier-crossing reactions. Analysis of experiments measuring biomolecular folding reactions has relied on expressions for properties of transition paths such as transition-path times and velocities that hold in the limit of large harmonic barriers, but real molecules often have relatively small barriers. Recent theoretical work presented more general expressions for transition-path properties. Here we extend this work, deriving expressions from the general case that can be applied to small harmonic barriers. We first compared the performance of small-barrier, large-barrier, and general solutions when applied to simulated transitions, focusing on improvements in estimates of the diffusion coefficient determined from transition times and velocities. We then applied these expressions to experimental data from force spectroscopy measurements of DNA hairpins. We found that the low-barrier approximation and exact solution reduced or resolved the small but systematic inconsistencies that had arisen from assuming large harmonic barriers, demonstrating the practical utility of the new equations for analyzing experimental data.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.234
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicDNA and Nucleic Acid ChemistryFrench-language works237,207