Unique Combinations of βαβ-Units and Π-Like Modules in Proteins and Specific Features of Their Amino Acid Sequences
Classification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".
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
Possible combinations of βαβ-units and Π-like modules in proteins in both right- and left-handed forms have been analyzed in detail. The correlation between the mutual arrangement of the structural elements in the polypeptide chain and their handedness has been shown. In the βαβΠ combinations, which is encountered most frequently in proteins, the Π-module follows the βαβ unit along the chain and both elements are right-handed. In the Πβαβ combinations, where the Π-module is located at the N end and the βαβ-unit follows it, the former is left-handed and the latter is right-handed. In relatively rare combinations of the left-handed βαβ-units and right-handed Π-modules, the βαβ-unit follows Π-module in the chain. The combinations of left-handed Π-modules and the left-handed βαβ-units are unobservable in proteins. It has also been shown that the Π-modules with a β-strand—α-helix—arch—β-strand structure are observed in proteins only in a right-handed form and half of them (51%) contains cis -prolines in their arches. These arches of nonhomologous proteins, as well as the positions of cis -prolines, nearly coincide when superimposed. The superimposed Π-modules also demonstrate that their overall folds are very similar. Structural alignment of their amino acid sequences has shown that the Π-modules have very similar sequence patterns of the key hydrophobic, hydrophilic, glycine, and cis -proline residues.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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