PROTHON: A Local Order Parameter-Based Method for Efficient Comparison of Protein Ensembles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The comparison of protein conformational ensembles is of central importance in structural biology. However, there are few computational methods for ensemble comparison, and those that are readily available, such as ENCORE, utilize methods that are sufficiently computationally expensive to be prohibitive for large ensembles. Here, a new method is presented for efficient representation and comparison of protein conformational ensembles. The method is based on the representation of a protein ensemble as a vector of probability distribution functions (pdfs), with each pdf representing the distribution of a local structural property such as the number of contacts between C β atoms. Dissimilarity between two conformational ensembles is quantified by the Jensen–Shannon distance between the corresponding set of probability distribution functions. The method is validated for conformational ensembles generated by molecular dynamics simulations of ubiquitin, as well as experimentally derived conformational ensembles of a 130 amino acid truncated form of human tau protein. In the ubiquitin ensemble data set, the method was up to 88 times faster than the existing ENCORE software, while simultaneously utilizing 48 times fewer computing cores. We make the method available as a Python package, called PROTHON, and provide a GitHub page with the Python source code at https://github.com/PlotkinLab/Prothon .
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
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".