MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3037068385 · doi:10.3389/fmolb.2020.577314

Optical Tweezers Approaches for Probing Multiscale Protein Mechanics and Assembly

2020· preprint· en· W3037068385 on OpenAlexafffund
Kathrin Lehmann, Marjan Shayegan, Gerhard A. Blab, Nancy R. Forde

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Molecular Biosciences · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCollagen: Extraction and Characterization
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsOptical tweezersNanotechnologyPhysicsMaterials scienceOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi-step assembly of individual protein building blocks is key to the formation of essential higher-order structures inside and outside of cells. Optical tweezers is a technique well suited to investigate the mechanics and dynamics of these structures at a variety of size scales. In this mini-review, we highlight experiments that have used optical tweezers to investigate protein assembly and mechanics, with a focus on the extracellular matrix protein collagen. These examples demonstrate how optical tweezers can be used to study mechanics across length scales, ranging from the single-molecule level to fibrils to protein networks. We discuss challenges in experimental design and interpretation, opportunities for integration with other experimental modalities, and applications of optical tweezers to current questions in protein mechanics and assembly.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.248
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Molecular BiosciencesSame topicCollagen: Extraction and CharacterizationFrench-language works237,207