CHARMM-GUI <i>Bicelle Builder</i>: An Extension of <i>Membrane Builder</i> for Modeling and Simulation of Bicelle Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Membrane mimetics, such as detergent micelles, nanodiscs, and amphipol complexes, which can provide membrane-like environments while retaining small and soluble features, have been utilized to study membrane proteins. A bicelle, composed of varying lipids and detergents, is a useful membrane mimetic because the lipid-to-detergent ratio, the q -value, can be adjusted to alter the properties of the aggregate, including the thickness and size of the bicelle. However, building a bicelle model for modeling and simulation studies requires nontrivial efforts, even for experts. We introduce CHARMM-GUI Bicelle Builder, a web-based platform that can generate various all-atom bicelle systems via a graphical user interface with all available lipids and detergents in Membrane Builder . To illustrate and validate Bicelle Builder with practical systems, we have modeled and simulated pure bicelles consisting of 1,2-dimyristoyl- sn -glycero-3-phosphocholine (DMPC) lipids with 1,2-dihexanoyl- sn -glycero-3-phosphocholine (C6DHPC) detergents and protein–bicelle complexes, composed of DMPC with C6DHPC, foscholine-10 (FOS10), and lysophosphatidylcholine-12 (LPC12) detergents. Our simulation results indicate that Bicelle Builder can generate reliable and robust bicelle models with and without proteins that retain DMPC bilayer characteristics. Bicelle Builder is expected to help researchers better understand not only bicelles themselves but also atomistic-level structures of protein–bicelle complexes that are often difficult to access through experimental approaches.
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".