Difference: TheoryExperiment (1 vs. 4)

Revision 410 Aug 2010 - Main.DavidCowburn

Changed:
<
<
META TOPICPARENT name="TheoryGroup"
>
>
META TOPICPARENT name="Main.TheoryGroup"
 Contents

Meetings of Theory and Experiment in Structural Biology

Changed:
<
<

Preliminary Discussion July 20 MetaGroup?

>
>

Preliminary Discussion July 20 MetaGroup

 

Summary of July 20 meeting. (Lazaridis)

Theorists present: myself, Andras Fiser, Roberto Sanchez, Marilyn Gunner,

Changed:
<
<
and Joe Dannenberg.
>
>
and Joe Dannenberg.
 Experimentalists present: David Cowburn, David Stokes, John Berriman, Iban
Changed:
<
<
Ubarretxena, Paul Gottlieb, MichaelGoger and others
>
>
Ubarretxena, Paul Gottlieb, MichaelGoger and others
 The meeting could be split into two sections:
Changed:
<
<
A) What theorists want B) What experimentalists want
>
>
A) What theorists want B) What experimentalists want
 A. Theorists primarily want more interaction and more opportunities for collaboration with experimentalists. Of course, interactions exist, through seminar series and the NYSB Discussion Group (at Rockefeller). But seminars deal mostly with published work. In many cases it is essential to start a collaboration while the work is in progress or at the planning stage. Such collaborations do take place, usually within the same institution. Is there a way to extend this beyond the single institution level? One obstacle to that is the general reluctance that people have talking about work in progress or research plans. Is there some efficient format for increasing communication between theorists and experimentalists, given that everybody has an overabundance of seminars etc to go to? Could there be, for example, some type of annual, closed-door, PI only, one-day symposium where PIs present an overview of work in progress and future directions in their labs? This is totally different from presenting finished work. On the issue of computational resources (e.g. a Blue Gene supercomputer), people would use them if they were available, but it wasn't their top concern.

B. David Cowburn prepared a list of experimental and theoretical areas and a matrix of possible interactions between them (see http://www.nysbc.net/twiki/bin/view/Main/TheoryExperiment ). Joe Dannenberg argued forcefully that Molecular Orbital theory should be added. One example of experimental needs is the interpretation of NMR dynamic data. Some of the things experimentalists need fall into the category of "utility" or "service", i.e., some technology that would help them with their data processing, target selection, and what not. Some theorists are interested in doing this, while others are interested more in the Physics of it all, such as the physical basis of a structure, or the mechanism of action of a protein. It would be interesting to hear more experimentalists answer the question "What do you need from theorists". I suspect many would say "Nothing, they are useless to me":=)

Other ideas:

Changed:
<
<
  • David Cowburn challenged theorists to come up with a list of areas they would propose to focus on, in the same way that the NMR community identified four areas of high priority (Membrane proteins, High throughput structure determination, Dynamic characterization of mechanism and orientation, Mapping of small molecule interactions with biomolecules).
>
>
  • David Cowburn challenged theorists to come up with a list of areas they would propose to focus on, in the same way that the NMR community identified four areas of high priority (Membrane proteins, High throughput structure determination, Dynamic characterization of mechanism and orientation, Mapping of small molecule interactions with biomolecules).
 
Changed:
<
<
  • The Scientific Committee of NYSBC has ~30 members from the three experimental categories (NMR,crystallography,EM). David is willing to add one or two theorists as consultants. Anybody interested?
>
>
  • The Scientific Committee of NYSBC has ~30 members from the three experimental categories (NMR,crystallography,EM). David is willing to add one or two theorists as consultants. Anybody interested?
 
Changed:
<
<
  • If you'd like, you can add your name to the NYSBC mailing list so that you'll be informed about meetings that take place there (email dcadmin@nysbc.org).
>
>
  • If you'd like, you can add your name to the NYSBC mailing list so that you'll be informed about meetings that take place there (email dcadmin@nysbc.org).
 Respectfully submitted,

Themis Lazaridis CCNY


Changed:
<
<

Discussant I, DavidCowburn?

>
>

Discussant I, DavidCowburn

 
Changed:
<
<
  • Overview of the matrix of interactions
>
>
  • Overview of the matrix of interactions
 Please feel free to make some additions / changes / disputes -- please sign your contributions

THEORY
Bioinformatics I - Genomics/ Function Annotation
Bioinformatics II - Function/ Structure prediction
Molecular simulation I - Thermodynamic focus
Molecular simulation II - Dynamics
Molecular simulation III - Experiment energy uses (XPLOR et al ) for refinement/ analysis
Signal processing theory / image analysis - Fourier, Bessel, parametric estimation methods , cross correlation
Statistics - what's significant
Mechanics - supramolecular analysis

EXPERIMENT (NYSBC centric)
NMR structure determination
NMR dynamics interpretation
NMR chem physics
Diffraction - phase issues
Diffraction - significance of structues
Structure analysis - novelty, predicitive power
EM - image enhancement
CEM - single particle reconstruction
EM - fitting I - specific fitting of density to "known" stuctures
EM -fitting II - fitting of multiple informtion sources to density
Changed:
<
<
  • Fill in your pieces!
>
>
  • Fill in your pieces!
 Comment -- this is obviously the side of what experimentalists want, and does not deal with a lot of questions of more fundemental significance to both theory and practice
THEORY EXPERIMENT
  NMR structure determination NMR dynamics interpretation NMR chem physics diff - phase diff - sign str. anal. EM image CEM SPR EM F- I EM F - II
BI - I construct design construct design,
signf. of motion
construct design construct design construct comparisons component stoichiometry comopnent stroichiometry component stroichiometry component stroichiometry component stroichiometry
BI - II comp modeling       comp modelling comp modelling   comp modelling of components comp modelling of components comp modelling of components
MS -I stability prediction comparison exp/ parameter prediciton, structure refinement   prediction comparison predicition comparison        
MS - II stability ? prediction comparison, reparametrization, long term comparison to us/ms motion                
Molecular simulation III - Experiment energy uses (XPLOR et al ) for refinement/ analysis utility     utility utility     future ? utility future ? utility future ? utility
Sig Proc utility utility utility utility utility   utility utility utility utility
Statistics underdeveloped utility underdeveloped utility underdeveloped utility underdeveloped ? utility underdeveloped ? utility     utility (undedv?) needed utility needed utility
Mechanics fast structure determination with intergation with MS-III extesnions of MS-II       ?   understanding likely subsstructure interconversions need? need ?

Changed:
<
<
>
>
 -- DavidCowburn - 08 Jul 2005
Added:
>
>
META TOPICMOVED by="DavidCowburn" date="1281464006" from="Main.TheoryExperiment" to="Staffarchive.TheoryExperiment"
 

Revision 321 Jul 2005 - Main.DavidCowburn

Changed:
<
<
META TOPICPARENT name="MetaGroup"
>
>
META TOPICPARENT name="TheoryGroup"
 Contents

Meetings of Theory and Experiment in Structural Biology

Preliminary Discussion July 20 MetaGroup?

Added:
>
>

Summary of July 20 meeting. (Lazaridis)

Theorists present: myself, Andras Fiser, Roberto Sanchez, Marilyn Gunner, and Joe Dannenberg.

Experimentalists present: David Cowburn, David Stokes, John Berriman, Iban Ubarretxena, Paul Gottlieb, MichaelGoger and others

The meeting could be split into two sections: A) What theorists want B) What experimentalists want

A. Theorists primarily want more interaction and more opportunities for collaboration with experimentalists. Of course, interactions exist, through seminar series and the NYSB Discussion Group (at Rockefeller). But seminars deal mostly with published work. In many cases it is essential to start a collaboration while the work is in progress or at the planning stage. Such collaborations do take place, usually within the same institution. Is there a way to extend this beyond the single institution level? One obstacle to that is the general reluctance that people have talking about work in progress or research plans. Is there some efficient format for increasing communication between theorists and experimentalists, given that everybody has an overabundance of seminars etc to go to? Could there be, for example, some type of annual, closed-door, PI only, one-day symposium where PIs present an overview of work in progress and future directions in their labs? This is totally different from presenting finished work. On the issue of computational resources (e.g. a Blue Gene supercomputer), people would use them if they were available, but it wasn't their top concern.

B. David Cowburn prepared a list of experimental and theoretical areas and a matrix of possible interactions between them (see http://www.nysbc.net/twiki/bin/view/Main/TheoryExperiment ). Joe Dannenberg argued forcefully that Molecular Orbital theory should be added. One example of experimental needs is the interpretation of NMR dynamic data. Some of the things experimentalists need fall into the category of "utility" or "service", i.e., some technology that would help them with their data processing, target selection, and what not. Some theorists are interested in doing this, while others are interested more in the Physics of it all, such as the physical basis of a structure, or the mechanism of action of a protein. It would be interesting to hear more experimentalists answer the question "What do you need from theorists". I suspect many would say "Nothing, they are useless to me":=)

Other ideas:

  • David Cowburn challenged theorists to come up with a list of areas they would propose to focus on, in the same way that the NMR community identified four areas of high priority (Membrane proteins, High throughput structure determination, Dynamic characterization of mechanism and orientation, Mapping of small molecule interactions with biomolecules).

  • The Scientific Committee of NYSBC has ~30 members from the three experimental categories (NMR,crystallography,EM). David is willing to add one or two theorists as consultants. Anybody interested?

  • If you'd like, you can add your name to the NYSBC mailing list so that you'll be informed about meetings that take place there (email dcadmin@nysbc.org).

Respectfully submitted,

Themis Lazaridis CCNY


 

Discussant I, DavidCowburn?

  • Overview of the matrix of interactions
Please feel free to make some additions / changes / disputes -- please sign your contributions

THEORYdown
Bioinformatics I - Genomics/ Function Annotation
Bioinformatics II - Function/ Structure prediction
Mechanics - supramolecular analysis
Molecular simulation I - Thermodynamic focus
Molecular simulation II - Dynamics
Molecular simulation III - Experiment energy uses (XPLOR et al ) for refinement/ analysis
Signal processing theory / image analysis - Fourier, Bessel, parametric estimation methods , cross correlation
Statistics - what's significant

EXPERIMENT (NYSBC centric)
NMR structure determination
NMR dynamics interpretation
NMR chem physics
Diffraction - phase issues
Diffraction - significance of structues
Structure analysis - novelty, predicitive power
EM - image enhancement
CEM - single particle reconstruction
EM - fitting I - specific fitting of density to "known" stuctures
EM -fitting II - fitting of multiple informtion sources to density

  • Fill in your pieces!
Comment -- this is obviously the side of what experimentalists want, and does not deal with a lot of questions of more fundemental significance to both theory and practice
THEORY EXPERIMENT
  NMR structure determination NMR dynamics interpretation NMR chem physics diff - phase diff - sign str. anal. EM image CEM SPR EM F- I EM F - II
BI - I construct design construct design,
signf. of motion
construct design construct design construct comparisons component stoichiometry comopnent stroichiometry component stroichiometry component stroichiometry component stroichiometry
BI - II comp modeling       comp modelling comp modelling   comp modelling of components comp modelling of components comp modelling of components
MS -I stability prediction comparison exp/ parameter prediciton, structure refinement   prediction comparison predicition comparison        
MS - II stability ? prediction comparison, reparametrization, long term comparison to us/ms motion                
Molecular simulation III - Experiment energy uses (XPLOR et al ) for refinement/ analysis utility     utility utility     future ? utility future ? utility future ? utility
Sig Proc utility utility utility utility utility   utility utility utility utility
Statistics underdeveloped utility underdeveloped utility underdeveloped utility underdeveloped ? utility underdeveloped ? utility     utility (undedv?) needed utility needed utility
Mechanics fast structure determination with intergation with MS-III extesnions of MS-II       ?   understanding likely subsstructure interconversions need? need ?

-- DavidCowburn - 08 Jul 2005

Revision 220 Jul 2005 - Main.DavidCowburn

 
META TOPICPARENT name="MetaGroup"
Contents

Meetings of Theory and Experiment in Structural Biology

Preliminary Discussion July 20 MetaGroup?

Discussant I, DavidCowburn?

  • Overview of the matrix of interactions
Please feel free to make some additions / changes / disputes -- please sign your contributions

THEORY
Bioinformatics I - Genomics/ Function Annotation
Bioinformatics II - Function/ Structure prediction
Molecular simulation I - Thermodynamic focus
Molecular simulation II - Dynamics
Molecular simulation III - Experiment energy uses (XPLOR et al ) for refinement/ analysis
Signal processing theory / image analysis - Fourier, Bessel, parametric estimation methods , cross correlation
Statistics - what's significant
Mechanics - supramolecular analysis

EXPERIMENT (NYSBC centric)
NMR structure determination
NMR dynamics interpretation
NMR chem physics
Diffraction - phase issues
Diffraction - significance of structues
Structure analysis - novelty, predicitive power
EM - image enhancement
CEM - single particle reconstruction
EM - fitting I - specific fitting of density to "known" stuctures
EM -fitting II - fitting of multiple informtion sources to density
Changed:
<
<
  • Fill in your pieces!
>
>
  • Fill in your pieces!
Added:
>
>
Comment -- this is obviously the side of what experimentalists want, and does not deal with a lot of questions of more fundemental significance to both theory and practice
 
THEORY EXPERIMENT
  NMR structure determination NMR dynamics interpretation NMR chem physics diff - phase diff - sign str. anal. EM image CEM SPR EM F- I EM F - II
BI - I construct design construct design,
signf. of motion
construct design construct design construct comparisons component stoichiometry comopnent stroichiometry component stroichiometry component stroichiometry component stroichiometry
BI - II comp modeling       comp modelling comp modelling   comp modelling of components comp modelling of components comp modelling of components
MS -I stability prediction comparison exp/ parameter prediciton, structure refinement   prediction comparison predicition comparison        
MS - II stability ? prediction comparison, reparametrization, long term comparison to us/ms motion                
Molecular simulation III - Experiment energy uses (XPLOR et al ) for refinement/ analysis utility     utility utility     future ? utility future ? utility future ? utility
Sig Proc utility utility utility utility utility   utility utility utility utility
Statistics underdeveloped utility underdeveloped utility underdeveloped utility underdeveloped ? utility underdeveloped ? utility     utility (undedv?) needed utility needed utility
Mechanics fast structure determination with intergation with MS-III extesnions of MS-II       ?   understanding likely subsstructure interconversions need? need ?

-- DavidCowburn - 08 Jul 2005

Revision 108 Jul 2005 - Main.DavidCowburn

 
META TOPICPARENT name="MetaGroup"
Contents

Meetings of Theory and Experiment in Structural Biology

Preliminary Discussion July 20 MetaGroup?

Discussant I, DavidCowburn?

  • Overview of the matrix of interactions
Please feel free to make some additions / changes / disputes -- please sign your contributions

THEORY
Bioinformatics I - Genomics/ Function Annotation
Bioinformatics II - Function/ Structure prediction
Molecular simulation I - Thermodynamic focus
Molecular simulation II - Dynamics
Molecular simulation III - Experiment energy uses (XPLOR et al ) for refinement/ analysis
Signal processing theory / image analysis - Fourier, Bessel, parametric estimation methods , cross correlation
Statistics - what's significant
Mechanics - supramolecular analysis

EXPERIMENT (NYSBC centric)
NMR structure determination
NMR dynamics interpretation
NMR chem physics
Diffraction - phase issues
Diffraction - significance of structues
Structure analysis - novelty, predicitive power
EM - image enhancement
CEM - single particle reconstruction
EM - fitting I - specific fitting of density to "known" stuctures
EM -fitting II - fitting of multiple informtion sources to density

  • Fill in your pieces!
THEORY EXPERIMENT
  NMR structure determination NMR dynamics interpretation NMR chem physics diff - phase diff - sign str. anal. EM image CEM SPR EM F- I EM F - II
BI - I construct design construct design,
signf. of motion
construct design construct design construct comparisons component stoichiometry comopnent stroichiometry component stroichiometry component stroichiometry component stroichiometry
BI - II comp modeling       comp modelling comp modelling   comp modelling of components comp modelling of components comp modelling of components
MS -I stability prediction comparison exp/ parameter prediciton, structure refinement   prediction comparison predicition comparison        
MS - II stability ? prediction comparison, reparametrization, long term comparison to us/ms motion                
Molecular simulation III - Experiment energy uses (XPLOR et al ) for refinement/ analysis utility     utility utility     future ? utility future ? utility future ? utility
Sig Proc utility utility utility utility utility   utility utility utility utility
Statistics underdeveloped utility underdeveloped utility underdeveloped utility underdeveloped ? utility underdeveloped ? utility     utility (undedv?) needed utility needed utility
Mechanics fast structure determination with intergation with MS-III extesnions of MS-II       ?   understanding likely subsstructure interconversions need? need ?

-- DavidCowburn - 08 Jul 2005

 
Copyright © by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding this intranet, Send feedback