Coronavirus peplomer interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By virtue of their lack of motility, viruses rely entirely on their own temperature (Brownian motion) to position themselves properly for cell attachment. Spiked viruses use one or more spikes (called peplomers) to attach. The coronavirus uses adjacent peplomer pairs. These peplomers, identically charged, repel one another over the surface of their convex capsids to form beautiful polyhedra. We identify the edges of these polyhedra with the most important peplomer hydrodynamic interactions. These convex capsids may or may not be spherical, and their peplomer population declines with infection time. These peplomers are short, equidimensional, and bulbous with triangular bulbs. In this short paper, we explore the interactions between nearby peplomer bulbs. By interactions, we mean the hydrodynamic interferences between the velocity profiles caused by the drag of the suspending fluid when the virus rotates. We find that these peplomer hydrodynamic interactions raise rotational diffusivity of the virus, and thus affect its ability to infect.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".