Serial femtosecond and serial synchrotron crystallography can yield data of equivalent quality: A systematic comparison
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For the two proteins myoglobin and fluoroacetate dehalogenase, we present a systematic comparison of crystallographic diffraction data collected by serial femtosecond (SFX) and serial synchrotron crystallography (SSX). To maximize comparability, we used the same batch of micron-sized crystals, the same sample delivery device, and the same data analysis software. Overall figures of merit indicate that the data of both radiation sources are of equivalent quality. For both proteins, reasonable data statistics can be obtained with approximately 5000 room-temperature diffraction images irrespective of the radiation source. The direct comparability of SSX and SFX data indicates that the quality of diffraction data obtained from these samples is linked to the properties of the crystals rather than to the radiation source. Therefore, for other systems with similar properties, time-resolved experiments can be conducted at the radiation source that best matches the desired time resolution.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it