MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382182002 · doi:10.1002/bies.202300040

New paradigms in actomyosin energy transduction: Critical evaluation of non‐traditional models for orthophosphate release

2023· article· en· W4382182002 on OpenAlexaff
Alf Månsson, Marko Ušaj, Luisa Moretto, Oleg S. Matusovsky, Lok Priya Velayuthan, Ran Friedman, Dilson E. Rassier

Bibliographic record

VenueBioEssays · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersLinnéuniversitetetVetenskapsrådet
KeywordsMyosinATP hydrolysisStroke (engine)Transduction (biophysics)BiophysicsNeuroscienceChemistryBiologyBiochemistryEnzymePhysicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Release of the ATP hydrolysis product ortophosphate (Pi) from the active site of myosin is central in chemo-mechanical energy transduction and closely associated with the main force-generating structural change, the power-stroke. Despite intense investigations, the relative timing between Pi-release and the power-stroke remains poorly understood. This hampers in depth understanding of force production by myosin in health and disease and our understanding of myosin-active drugs. Since the 1990s and up to today, models that incorporate the Pi-release either distinctly before or after the power-stroke, in unbranched kinetic schemes, have dominated the literature. However, in recent years, alternative models have emerged to explain apparently contradictory findings. Here, we first compare and critically analyze three influential alternative models proposed previously. These are either characterized by a branched kinetic scheme or by partial uncoupling of Pi-release and the power-stroke. Finally, we suggest critical tests of the models aiming for a unified picture.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.008
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.113
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioEssaysSame topicCardiomyopathy and Myosin StudiesFrench-language works237,207