MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402423508 · doi:10.24908/iqurcp18022

Non-equilibrium Statistical Mechanics in Biological Systems

2024· article· en· W4402423508 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Josef Naus

Bibliographic record

VenueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference Proceedings · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtein Structure and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatistical mechanicsStatistical physicsClassical mechanicsMathematical economicsPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unlike equilibrium systems, which are characterized by a time-independent distribution of particles and energy, non-equilibrium systems experience constant fluxes of matter or energy, often due to external driving forces. These systems can exhibit a wide range of dynamic behaviors some of which can appear as self-organizing. Building on the framework of non-equilibrium statistical mechanics, Jeremy England in his paper "Statistical Physics of Adaptation" derives an equation which relates the relative forwards probability of transitioning between two possible macrostates with their respective reverse probability, entropy, and average energy dissipation across all possible micro trajectories. He showed that structures which are better at absorbing and dissipating energy into their surroundings during their formation have a higher likelihood of occurring, which can possibly explain how life-like behaviors emerge in non-equilibrium systems. In this project, we test England's equation on a toy model of self replicating populations, as well as attempt to apply it to a biological dataset. In the toy model under certain constraints we do find that our intuition of the systems dynamics does track with England's equation, that is we observe that the population with the greatest replication rate tends to have the highest energy dissipation when it's population makes up the greater fraction of the total population of particles. In the biological dataset we analyze protein-protein interactions and how the relative bonding energy and binding rates compare for different mutations. We explore the limitations of his equation when trying to make predictions about highly complex biological systems.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference ProceedingsSame topicProtein Structure and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207