MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mathematical model of chromosomal dynamics during DNA double strand break repair in budding yeast

2022· article· en· W4226478798 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Shinjiro Nakahata, Tetsushi Komoto, Masashi Fujii, Akinori Awazu

Bibliographic record

VenueBiophysics and Physicobiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Genetics
KeywordsChromatinBiologyCell biologyHistoneYeastDNADNA repairGeneticsBudding yeastDNA damageSaccharomyces cerevisiaeBiophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the repair of double-strand breaks (DSBs) in DNA, active mobilizations for conformational changes in chromosomes have been widely observed in eukaryotes, from yeast to animal and plant cells. DSB-damaged loci in the yeast genome showed increased mobility and relocation to the nuclear periphery. However, the driving forces behind DSB-induced chromatin dynamics remain unclear. In this study, mathematical models of normal and DSB-damaged yeast chromosomes were developed to simulate their structural dynamics. The effects of histone degradation in the whole nucleus and the change in the physical properties of damaged loci due to the binding of SUMOylated repair proteins were considered in the model of DSB-induced chromosomes based on recent experimental results. The simulation results reproduced DSB-induced changes to structural and dynamical features by which the combination of whole nuclear histone degradation and the rigid structure formation of repair protein accumulations on damaged loci were suggested to be primary contributors to the process by which damaged loci are relocated to the nuclear periphery.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiophysics and PhysicobiologySame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207