Comparison of the multiple oligomeric structures observed for the Rvb1 and Rvb2 proteinsThis paper is one of a selection of papers published in this special issue entitled 8th International Conference on AAA Proteins and has undergone the Journal's usual peer review process.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Rvb1 and Rvb2 proteins are 2 members of the AAA+ family, involved in roles as diverse as chromatin remodeling, transcription, small nucleolar RNA maturation, cellular transformation, signaling of apoptosis and mitosis. These proteins are capable of playing a role in such diverse cellular activities because they are components of different macromolecular assemblies. In the last few years, there has been a number of groups reporting on the structure of purified Rvbs. The reported results have been rather controversial, because there are significant differences observed among the published structures in spite of the high degree of homology among these proteins. Surprisingly, contradictions are observed not only between structures representing the Rvb proteins from different species, but also between protein structures from the same species. This review describes the available Rvb structures from different species and also makes a comparative analysis of them. Finally, we identify some aspects of these structural studies worth pursuing in additional investigations to ensure that the reported structures reflect physiologically relevant conformations of the Rvb1-Rvb2 complex.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".