Automatic Bayesian Weighting for SAXS Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) experiments are important in structural biology because they are solution methods, and do not require crystallization of protein complexes. Structure determination from SAXS data, however, poses some difficulties. Computation of a SAXS profile from a protein model is expensive in CPU time. Hence, rather than directly refining against the data, most computational methods generate a large number of conformers and then filter the structures based on how well they satisfy the SAXS data. To address this issue in an efficient manner, we propose here a Bayesian model for SAXS data and use it to directly drive a Monte Carlo simulation. We show that the automatic weighting of SAXS data is the key to finding optimal structures efficiently. Another key problem with obtaining structures from SAXS data is that proteins are often flexible and the data represents an average over a structural ensemble. To address this issue, we first characterize the stability of the best model with extensive molecular dynamics simulations. We analyse the resulting trajectories further to characterize a dynamic structural ensemble satisfying the SAXS data. The combination of methods is applied to a tandem of domains from the protein PTPN4, which are connected by an unstructured linker. We show that the SAXS data contain information that supports and extends other experimental findings. We also show that the conformation obtained by the Bayesian analysis is stable, but that a minor conformation is present. We propose a mechanism in which the linker may maintain PTPN4 in an inhibited enzymatic state.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".