Computational Analysis of the SARS-CoV-2 RBD–ACE2-Binding Process Based on MD and the 3D-RISM Theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The binding process of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) to the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the severe acute respiratory syndrome-like coronavirus 2 spike protein was investigated using molecular dynamics simulation and the three-dimensional reference interaction-site model theory. The results suggested that the protein-binding process consists of a protein-protein approaching step, followed by a local structural rearrangement step. In the approaching step, the interprotein interaction energy decreased as the proteins approached each other, whereas the solvation free energy increased. As the proteins approached, the glycan of ACE2 first established a hydrogen bond with the RBD. Thereafter, the number of interprotein hydrogen bonds increased rapidly. The solvation free energy increased because of the desolvation of the protein as it approached its partner. The spatial distribution function of the solvent revealed the presence of hydrogen bonds bridged by water molecules on the RBD-ACE2 interface. Finally, principal component analysis revealed that ACE2 showed a pronounced conformational change, whereas there was no significant change in RBD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".