721 wiggle sticks too

[jflat06]

All of the solutions that I have tried have resulted in the backbone crumpling and a terrible score. Is this still happening for people?

[MurloW]

I can wiggle 727 at 0.0CI with movement no greater than micropoints.
On the other hand, when I open other players' solutions (for evo) this doesn't happen, and they crumple as usual.
Also: wiggling at low CI (0.2 or whatever) doesn't compact it like on most puzzles, unless I disable backbone constraints during the low CI wiggle and quickly enable them again. That seems to loosen it up and give me literal wiggle room.

[MurloW]

I shared a solution to scientists to check it out, 727. Called: 0.0CI wiggle – jflat06

[jflat06]

I've done some investigating, and as far as I can tell, this is the expected behavior of the minimizer in Rosetta.

The clashing importance slider modifies the fa_rep score weight in the score function that is used by the minimizer.

fa_rep is the repulsive score term that gives you a penalty when things are too close. In the solutions where this stickiness exists (that I've seen), there aren't atoms from different residues that are close to each other. In situations such as this, the penalty from fa_rep is minimal to begin with, and making it 0 doesn't affect the energy landscape very much. The other score terms (such as hydrogen bonding, bands, etc) are much stronger in this situation, and so they hold the protein in its current shape even when CI=0.

It might feel wrong, but there's no guarantee that the CI slider/minimizer should behave in an intuitive way.

[MurloW]

Okay, so…

still pretty weird then that when I open a shared solution by another player that evo'ed my solo, it behaves as expected (crumpling together with 0.1 - 0.3 CI wiggles);
and by the time I've evo'ed it (through mutation, for example) it won't budge by more than micropoints at 0.0 CI ? It seems like being in my client "infects" it with stickiness.. O.o

Keep in mind this happens on 727, like, all the time for me.

[jflat06]

These issues likely happen on 727 more often because the endpoints of the designable segment force it to stretch out, which prevents it from forming conformations which would collapse on themselves. The nature of your solutions are probably favorable in the fa_rep-devoid energy landscape, because you are optimizing for the other score terms.

[MurloW]

I see.. I think I kinda understand .. :p
Okay, thanks for all the help and info!