MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385787022 · doi:10.53730/ijhs.v7ns1.14495

Homology modeling – a step towards vaccine development by analyzing structure of haemophilus influenza protein, transcriptional regulator H10994

2023· article· en· W4385787022 on OpenAlexaff
Anila Farid, Madeeha Jadoon, Sofia Shoukat, Uzma Faryal, Bilal Karim, Anwar Shahzad

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Health Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
Canadian institutionsAbbott (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRamachandran plotRegulatorMODELLERHomology modelingTranscriptional regulationTranscription (linguistics)Homology (biology)GeneBiologyMicrobiologyComputational biologyTranscription factorProtein structureGeneticsBiochemistryPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Haemophilus influenza is a type of bacterium that is non motile, gram negative and causes poisoning and infection including pneumonia,bronchitis etc. In order to study the resistivity of H.influenza protein, transcription regulator: HI0433, homology modeling is an important step to predict structure. Material and methods: Bioinformatics such as CMR, BLAST, modeller Prcheck and Prosa was carried out to find 3D structure of protein. Results and Discussion: H.influenza has 1792 proteins. Out of these, 456 hypothetical proteins were found. Homology modeling of transcriptional regulator H10994 was done it consists of 8 helices and 7 beta sheets. Ramachandran plot has shown that it consists of 95.2% particles in maximum allowed regions, 2.9 % particles in fewer allowed region, 1.4% particles in inadequate allowed region, 5% particles in disallowed region. Conclusion: By homology modeling of H. influenza, transcriptional regulator protein (HI0433), structure was designed which has provided enough information for vaccine development to control its transcription for causing disease.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Health SciencesSame topicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies ResearchFrench-language works237,207