Photoswitchable Affinity Reagents: Computational Design and Efficient Red‐Light Switching
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Photo‐controlled affinity reagents seek to provide modular spatiotemporal control of bioactivity by conferring photo‐switchability of function on an affinity reagent scaffold. Herein we used Rosetta‐based computational methods to screen for sites on the Fynomer affinity reagent structure for attachment of photoswitchable cross‐linkers. Both established UV‐based cross‐linkers (azobenzene‐iodoacetamide (IAC)) and an azonium‐based efficient red‐light‐switchable cross‐linker, piperazino‐tetra‐ ortho ‐methoxy azobenzene (PIP), were then tested experimentally. Several sites compatible with Fynomer function were identified, including sites showing rapid (<10 s) red light (633 nm) modulation of function. Although a range of overall target binding affinities were observed, the degree of photo‐switchability of Fynomer function was generally small (<twofold). Computational models suggest that local flexibility limits the degree of switching seen in these designs.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".