Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26331254›Full record

ArticleBiophysical journal2015

Bayesian Uncertainty Quantification for Bond Energies and Mobilities Using Path Integral Analysis.

Joshua C Chang, Pak-Wing Fok, Tom Chou

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biophysical journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Joshua C ChangMathematical Biosciences Institute, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Electronic address: joshchang@ucla.edu.
Pak-Wing FokDepartment of Mathematical Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware. Electronic address: pakwing@udel.edu.
Tom ChouDepartments of Biomathematics and Mathematics, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California. Electronic address: tomchou@ucla.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dynamic single-molecule force spectroscopy is often used to distort bonds. The resulting responses, in the form of rupture forces, work applied, and trajectories of displacements, are used to reconstruct bond potentials. Such approaches often rely on simple parameterizations of one-dimensional bond potentials, assumptions on equilibrium starting states, and/or large amounts of trajectory data. Parametric approaches typically fail at inferring complicated bond potentials with multiple minima, while piecewise estimation may not guarantee smooth results with the appropriate behavior at large distances. Existing techniques, particularly those based on work theorems, also do not address spatial variations in the diffusivity that may arise from spatially inhomogeneous coupling to other degrees of freedom in the macromolecule. To address these challenges, we develop a comprehensive empirical Bayesian approach that incorporates data and regularization terms directly into a path integral. All experimental and statistical parameters in our method are estimated directly from the data. Upon testing our method on simulated data, our regularized approach requires less data and allows simultaneous inference of both complex bond potentials and diffusivity profiles. Crucially, we show that the accuracy of the reconstructed bond potential is sensitive to the spatially varying diffusivity and accurate reconstruction can be expected only when both are simultaneously inferred. Moreover, after providing a means for self-consistently choosing regularization parameters from data, we derive posterior probability distributions, allowing for uncertainty quantification.

Indexed as

Chemical PhenomenaUncertaintyBayes TheoremDiffusionMotion

Identifiers

PMID26331254
PMCPMC4564684

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.