MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899572362 · doi:10.3233/fi-2018-1750

Approximation Algorithms for Three Dimensional Protein Folding

2018· article· en· W2899572362 on OpenAlexaff
Dipan Shaw, A. S. M. Shohidull Islam, Shuvasish Karmaker, M. Sohel Rahman

Bibliographic record

VenueFundamenta Informaticae · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtein Structure and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHexagonal prismLattice (music)AlgorithmDiagonalProtein structure predictionCrystal structureLattice proteinHexagonal latticeProtein structureProtein foldingProtein secondary structureHexagonal crystal systemMathematicsComputer scienceCombinatoricsCrystallographyPhysicsGeometryChemistryCondensed matter physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predicting the secondary structure of a protein using a lattice model is one of the most studied computational problems in bioinformatics. Here the secondary structure or three dimensional structure of a protein is predicted from its amino acid sequence. The secondary structure refers to the local sub-structures of a protein. Simplified energy models have been proposed in the literature on the basis of interaction of amino acid residues in proteins. We focus on a well researched model known as the Hydrophobic-Polar (HP) energy model. In this paper, we propose the hexagonal prism lattice with diagonals that can overcome the problems of other lattice structures, e.g., parity problem. We give two approximation algorithms for protein folding on this lattice using HP model. Our first algorithm leads us to a similar structure of helix structure that is commonly found in a protein structure. This motivates us to propose the next algorithm with a better approximation ratio. Finally, we analyze the algorithms on the basis of intensity of the chemical forces along the different types of edges of hexagonal prism lattice with diagonals.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFundamenta InformaticaeSame topicProtein Structure and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207