puzzle picture
765: Unsolved Salmonella Bacteriophage: Cryo-electron Density with Alignments
Status: Closed


151armadillo314 78 1584  10,8541
152joremen 78 44  10,8491
153Inkedhands 78 1584  10,8471
154Mr_Jolty 78 1584 Natural Abilities10,8371
155hada 78 401  10,8281
156martinf 78 466  10,8111
157retiredmichael 16 3  10,8101
158Angus 27 46 Beta Folders10,7721
159Savas 78 420 Eὕρηκα! Heureka!10,7671
160SouperGenious 78 1584  10,7491
161zazila1 78 1584  10,7451
162aleitch 78 1584  10,7431
163karost 78 1584  10,7421
164crawlee34225 78 1584  10,7361
165anderssundin 78 1584  10,7341
166leprechaun 78 1584 Crunching Family10,7331
167trebach 78 1584  10,7181
168Sadler 78 1584 Russian team10,7091
169Phate42 78 1584  10,7071
170ulyanaiguana 78 1584  10,7061
171mcharawi 78 1584  10,6881
172larry25427 78 276  10,6771
173SHK5P 78 1584  10,6761
174YGK 78 1584  10,6261
175aspadistra 78 227 DSN @ Home10,5841

Need this puzzle? Log in to download.  


bkoep's picture
User offline. Last seen 13 hours 21 min ago. Offline
Joined: 11/15/2012
Groups: None
More details:

NOTE: If you did not manually save a solution that you want to use from puzzles (737, 740, 749, or 756), you can go back to those puzzles, manually save it, and the solution should appear in your manual saves for this puzzle.

Original secondary structure predictions from the SAM server are here:

More info about Cryo-electron microscopy here:

Joined: 09/21/2011
Groups: Void Crushers
Density more coarse

This has made seeing features in the cloud a lot harder. Dont like it.

bkoep's picture
User offline. Last seen 13 hours 21 min ago. Offline
Joined: 11/15/2012
Groups: None
Coarse density

We realize the coarser density map in this puzzle makes things more difficult—I should explain the reason for that.

The original density map we have is an average density map, constructed out of many, very noisy, data from cryo-EM experiments. Most features of the average map are real, but other features are false artifacts. So even if you could place an atom perfectly into every feature in this map, some of those atoms would be in the wrong place.

To control for this "over-fitting" to the density map, we split the data into two sets. This way, you can use data from one set to guide your predictions, and we can use data from the other set to validate your predictions. If your solution matches the native protein, then it should fit both maps equally well; if your solution is "over-fit" to your half of the data, then the solution may fit very well into your prediction map, but will fit our validation map very poorly.

Unfortunately, when we use only half the data to calculate the new average, the resulting map is more noisy. So this map will be more difficult to use, but we have a way to tell how accurate your solutions really are.

Susume's picture
User offline. Last seen 1 week 5 days ago. Offline
Joined: 10/02/2011

The cloud in 756 was not "sticky" enough - not enough score boost, so the protein would not stay in it but would wander around instead. It also had a lack of recognizable landmarks (sidechains). The current cloud I find not useful at all.

alwen's picture
User offline. Last seen 4 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 10/03/2011
This iteration of the cloud

This iteration of the cloud is more annoying than helpful, at least for play. Can't see where anything should go, no landmark sidechains or bonds - it's just obscuring the view and not guiding the fold.

Joined: 09/21/2011
Groups: Void Crushers
I would say: repost the

I would say: repost the puzzle with the original cloud. (Exactly the same so earlier solutions go to the same position).
And if you want with some player solutions.
I am convinced I found a good starting point the last 2 days but ran out of time to fully explore it. And with this cloud I cant use that solution.

Joined: 03/30/2013
Groups: Go Science
half the data

Hey bkoep,
In cryo-EM is it customary to split the data 50/50 into working and test sets? This is the treatment you implied above. or is it sufficient to split it 90/10 or 95/5? and would that give a more meaningful map?

bkoep's picture
User offline. Last seen 13 hours 21 min ago. Offline
Joined: 11/15/2012
Groups: None
Split data

Good question, Anfinsen. With cryo-EM data, we're limited in how much we can reduce the size of the test data because other sources of noise become more prominent (namely, particle orientation error). I'm afraid that if we altered the distribution further, the testing map would be useless before we could see any appreciable improvement in the working map.

Get Started: Download
  Windows    OSX    Linux  
(10.7 or later)

Are you new to Foldit? Click here.

Are you a student? Click here.

Are you an educator? Click here.
Only search fold.it
Recommend Foldit
User login
Top New Users

Developed by: UW Center for Game Science, UW Institute for Protein Design, Northeastern University, Vanderbilt University Meiler Lab, UC Davis
Supported by: DARPA, NSF, NIH, HHMI, Amazon, Microsoft, Adobe, RosettaCommons