1,721,032 research outputs found
QMEAN: A comprehensive scoring function for model quality assessment
No full textIn protein structure prediction, a considerable number of alternative models are usually produced from which subsequently the final model has to be selected. Thus, a scoring function for the identification of the best model within an ensemble of alternative models is a key component of most protein structure prediction pipelines. QMEAN, which stands for Qualitative Model Energy ANalysis, is a composite scoring function describing the major geometrical aspects of protein structures. Five different structural descriptors are used. The local geometry is analyzed by a new kind of torsion angle potential over three consecutive amino acids. A secondary structure-specific distance-dependent pairwise residue-level potential is used to assess long-range interactions. A solvation potential describes the burial status of the residues. Two simple terms describing the agreement of predicted and calculated secondary structure and solvent accessibility, respectively, are also included. A variety of different implementations are investigated and several approaches to combine and optimize them are discussed. QMEAN was tested on several standard decoy sets including a molecular dynamics simulation decoy set as well as on a comprehensive data set of totally 22,420 models from server predictions for the 95 targets of CASP7. In a comparison to five well-established model quality assessment programs, QMEAN shows a statistically significant improvement over nearly all quality measures describing the ability of the scoring function to identify the native structure and to discriminate good from bad models. The three-residue torsion angle potential turned out to be very effective in recognizing the native fold
QMEANclust : estimation of protein model quality by combining a composite scoring function with structural density information
Get PDFABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The selection of the most accurate protein model from a set of alternatives is a crucial step in protein structure prediction both in template-based and ab initio approaches. Scoring functions have been developed which can either return a quality estimate for a single model or derive a score from the information contained in the ensemble of models for a given sequence. Local structural features occurring more frequently in the ensemble have a greater probability of being correct. Within the context of the CASP experiment, these so called consensus methods have been shown to perform considerably better in selecting good candidate models, but tend to fail if the best models are far from the dominant structural cluster. In this paper we show that model selection can be improved if both approaches are combined by pre-filtering the models used during the calculation of the structural consensus. RESULTS: Our recently published QMEAN composite scoring function has been improved by including an all-atom interaction potential term. The preliminary model ranking based on the new QMEAN score is used to select a subset of reliable models against which the structural consensus score is calculated. This scoring function called QMEANclust achieves a correlation coefficient of predicted quality score and GDT_TS of 0.9 averaged over the 98 CASP7 targets and perform significantly better in selecting good models from the ensemble of server models than any other groups participating in the quality estimation category of CASP7. Both scoring functions are also benchmarked on the MOULDER test set consisting of 20 target proteins each with 300 alternatives models generated by MODELLER. QMEAN outperforms all other tested scoring functions operating on individual models, while the consensus method QMEANclust only works properly on decoy sets containing a certain fraction of near-native conformations. We also present a local version of QMEAN for the per-residue estimation of model quality (QMEANlocal) and compare it to a new local consensus-based approach. CONCLUSION: Improved model selection is obtained by using a composite scoring function operating on single models in order to enrich higher quality models which are subsequently used to calculate the structural consensus. The performance of consensus-based methods such as QMEANclust highly depends on the composition and quality of the model ensemble to be analysed. Therefore, performance estimates for consensus methods based on large meta-datasets (e.g. CASP) might overrate their applicability in more realistic modelling situations with smaller sets of models based on individual methods
Global and local model quality estimation at CASP8 using the scoring functions QMEAN and QMEANclust
No full textIdentifying the best candidate model among an ensemble of alternatives is crucial in protein structure prediction. For this purpose, scoring functions have been developed which either calculate a quality estimate on the basis of a single model or derive a score from the information contained in the ensemble of models generated for a given sequence (i.e., consensus methods). At CASP7, consensus methods have performed considerably better than scoring functions operating on single models. However, consensus methods tend to fail if the best models are far from the center of the dominant structural cluster. At CASP8, we investigated whether our hybrid method QMEANclust may overcome this limitation by combining the QMEAN composite scoring function operating on single models with consensus information. We participated with four different scoring functions in the quality assessment category. The QMEANclust consensus scoring function turned out to be a successful method both for the ranking of entire models but especially for the estimation of the per-residue model quality. In this article, we briefly describe the two scoring functions QMEAN and QMEANclust and discuss their performance in the context of what went right and wrong at CASP8. Both scoring functions are publicly available at http://swissmodel.expasy.org/qmean/. Proteins 2009. (c) 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Get PDF“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Get PDFWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Get PDFWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
No full textWe have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
- …
