Ensemble Generation for Linear and Cyclic Peptides Using a Reservoir Replica Exchange Molecular Dynamics Implementation in GROMACS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The profile of shapes presented by a cyclic peptide modulates its therapeutic efficacy and is represented by the ensemble of its sampled conformations. Although some algorithms excel at creating a diverse ensemble of cyclic peptide conformations, they seldom address the entropic contribution of flexible conformations and often have significant practical difficulty producing an ensemble with converged and reliable thermodynamic properties. In this study, an accelerated molecular dynamics (MD) method, namely, reservoir replica exchange MD (R-REMD or Res-REMD), was implemented in GROMACS ver. 4.6.7 and benchmarked on two small cyclic peptide model systems: a cyclized furin cleavage site of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike (cyclo-(CGPRRARSG)) and oxytocin (disulfide-bonded CYIQNCPLG). Additionally, we also benchmarked Res-REMD on alanine dipeptide and Trpzip2 to demonstrate its validity and efficiency over REMD. For Trpzip2, Res-REMD coupled with an umbrella-sampling-derived reservoir generated similar folded fractions as regular REMD but on a much faster time scale. For cyclic peptides, Res-REMD appeared to be marginally faster than REMD in ensemble generation. Finally, Res-REMD was more effective in sampling rare events such as trans to cis peptide bond isomerization. We provide a GitHub page with the modified GROMACS source code for running Res-REMD at https://github.com/PlotkinLab/Reservoir-REMD.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".