MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038281272 · doi:10.1017/s1431927600033870

3D Reconstruction from STEM Images of Xanthine Dehydrogenase and Insulin Receptor: Refinements and Molecular Modelling.

2000· article· en· W3038281272 on OpenAlexaff
DR Beniac, RZ-T Luo, AB Fernandes, Tomio Iwasaki, CC Yip, F.P. Ottensmeyer

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroscopy and Microanalysis · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEndoplasmic Reticulum Stress and Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsXanthineInsulin receptorComputational biologyChemistryComputer scienceInsulinBiochemistryBiologyMedicineInternal medicineEnzymeInsulin resistance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We have reconstructed the three-dimensional quaternary structure of the complete 480 kDa insulin receptor (IR), complexed with Nanogold - labeled insulin, and the 290 kDa Xanthine Dehydrogenase (XDH). Both molecules were imaged by low-dose, low-temperature dark field scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM). XDH and IR were both freeze-plunged in liquid ethane, and transferred to the STEM (VG HB 601) where they were freeze dried at -130°C. Reconstruction was carried out using the method of quaternion-assisted angular reconstruction (IQAD) as described previously. XDH was further refined by an iterative process in which the IQAD produced volume was used as a reference for further refinements. Separate reconstructions of two sets of half the images indicated an inter-reconstruction resolution of 20 Å and 9 Å by phase residual criteria for the IR and XDH reconstructions, respectively.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.220
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 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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicroscopy and MicroanalysisSame topicEndoplasmic Reticulum Stress and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207