Skip main navigation

Cookies Notification

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By continuing to browse the site, you consent to the use of our cookies. Learn More
×

System Upgrade on Tue, May 28th, 2024 at 2am (EDT)

Existing users will be able to log into the site and access content. However, E-commerce and registration of new users may not be available for up to 12 hours.
For online purchase, please visit us again. Contact us at customercare@wspc.com for any enquiries.

SEARCH GUIDE  Download Search Tip PDF File

  • articleNo Access

    THE AZIMUTH STRUCTURE OF NUCLEAR COLLISIONS — I

    We describe azimuth structure commonly associated with elliptic and directed flow in the context of 2D angular autocorrelations for the purpose of precise separation of so-called nonflow (mainly minijets) from flow. We extend the Fourier-transform description of azimuth structure to include power spectra and autocorrelations related by the Wiener–Khintchine theorem. We analyze several examples of conventional flow analysis in that context and question the relevance of reaction plane estimation to flow analysis. We introduce the 2D angular autocorrelation with examples from data analysis and describe a simulation exercise which demonstrates precise separation of flow and nonflow using the 2D autocorrelation method. We show that an alternative correlation measure based on Pearson's normalized covariance provides a more intuitive measure of azimuth structure.

  • articleNo Access

    COMPACTNESS DETERMINES PROTEIN FOLDING TYPE

    We have demonstrated here that protein compactness, which we define as the ratio of the accessible surface area of a protein to that of the ideal sphere of the same volume, is one of the factors determining the mechanism of protein folding. Proteins with multi-state kinetics, on average, are more compact (compactness is 1.49 ± 0.02 for proteins within the size range of 101–151 amino acid residues) than proteins with two-state kinetics (compactness is 1.59 ± 0.03 for proteins within the same size range of 101–151 amino acid residues). We have shown that compactness for homologous proteins can explain both the difference in folding rates and the difference in folding mechanisms.