Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 347

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 56 of the 56 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

SEDPHAT – A platform for global ITC analysis and global multi-method analysis of molecular interactions

Open access
Zhao, Huaying, Piszczek, Grzegorz, Schuck, Peter·2015·Methods

Abstract

Isothermal titration calorimetry experiments can provide significantly more detailed information about molecular interactions when combined in global analysis. For example, global analysis can improve the precision of binding affinity and enthalpy, and of possible linkage parameters, even for simple bimolecular interactions, and greatly facilitate the study of multi-site and multi-component systems with competition or cooperativity. A pre-requisite for global analysis is the departure from the traditional binding model, including an ‘n’-value describing unphysical, non-integral numbers of sites. Instead, concentration correction factors can be introduced to account for either errors in the concentration determination or for the presence of inactive fractions of material. SEDPHAT is a computer program that embeds these ideas and provides a graphical user interface for the seamless combination of biophysical experiments to be globally modeled with a large number of different binding models. It offers statistical tools for the rigorous determination of parameter errors, correlations, as well as advanced statistical functions for global ITC (gITC) and global multi-method analysis (GMMA). SEDPHAT will also take full advantage of error bars of individual titration data points determined with the unbiased integration software NITPIC. The present communication reviews principles and strategies of global analysis for ITC and its extension to GMMA in SEDPHAT. We will also introduce a new graphical tool for aiding experimental design by surveying the concentration space and generating simulated data sets, which can be subsequently statistically examined for their information content. This procedure can replace the ‘c’-value as an experimental design parameter, which ceases to be helpful for multi-site systems and in the context of gITC.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ymeth.2014.11.012

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 56 references

Cited by

See all 347

Metadata

Authors
Zhao, H., Piszczek, G., & Schuck, P.
Venue
Methods
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-04
Volume
76
Pages
137-148
ISSN
1046-2023 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2028035578
Cited by
347
References
56
FWCI
12.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: SEDPHAT – A platform for global ITC analysis and global multi-method analysis of molecular interactions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ymeth.2014.11.012
The paper
Zhao, H., Piszczek, G., & Schuck, P. (2015). SEDPHAT – A platform for global ITC analysis and global multi-method analysis of molecular interactions. Methods. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymeth.2014.11.012

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.