***TASK***
the task is to simplify the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***INPUT***
the input is the abstract of a biomedical literature

***OUTPUT***
the output is the simplified abstract for the input abstract of a biomedical literature
***DOCUMENTATION*** 
***EXAMPLES*** 
Input:
Output:

***EXAMPLES***
Input: Functionally analogous enzymes are those that catalyze similar reactions on similar substrates but do not share common ancestry, providing a window on the different structural strategies nature has used to evolve required catalysts. Identification and use of this information to improve reaction classification and computational annotation of enzymes newly discovered in the genome projects would benefit from systematic determination of reaction similarities. Here, we quantified similarity in bond changes for overall reactions and catalytic mechanisms for 95 pairs of functionally analogous enzymes (non-homologous enzymes with identical first three numbers of their EC codes) from the MACiE database. Similarity of overall reactions was computed by comparing the sets of bond changes in the transformations from substrates to products. For similarity of mechanisms, sets of bond changes occurring in each mechanistic step were compared; these similarities were then used to guide global and local alignments of mechanistic steps. Using this metric, only 44% of pairs of functionally analogous enzymes in the dataset had significantly similar overall reactions. For these enzymes, convergence to the same mechanism occurred in 33% of cases, with most pairs having at least one identical mechanistic step. Using our metric, overall reaction similarity serves as an upper bound for mechanistic similarity in functional analogs. For example, the four carbon-oxygen lyases acting on phosphates (EC 4.2.3) show neither significant overall reaction similarity nor significant mechanistic similarity. By contrast, the three carboxylic-ester hydrolases (EC 3.1.1) catalyze overall reactions with identical bond changes and have converged to almost identical mechanisms. The large proportion of enzyme pairs that do not show significant overall reaction similarity (56%) suggests that at least for the functionally analogous enzymes studied here, more stringent criteria could be used to refine definitions of EC sub-subclasses for improved discrimination in their classification of enzyme reactions. The results also indicate that mechanistic convergence of reaction steps is widespread, suggesting that quantitative measurement of mechanistic similarity can inform approaches for functional annotation.
Output:  When species evolve, their genes duplicate and diverge to allow for adaptation of their functional repertoires to the changing environment. In this scenario, unrelated genes can convergently evolve to produce proteins with the same molecular function, termed “functionally analogous.” A quantitative determination of the reaction similarities among functionally analogous enzymes could provide insight about the different structural solutions nature has used to evolve similar catalysts. Bond changes between substrates and products, and between successive reaction intermediates, were used to compare the reactions catalyzed and the mechanisms of catalysis for 95 pairs of functionally analogous enzymes. Less than half of the reactions catalyzed by unrelated enzymes, but defined as similar by the Enzyme Commission (EC) classification, are similar in terms of bond changes, suggesting that this classification often fails to capture quantitative differences between many enzyme reactions. Furthermore, we addressed for the first time whether the chemical mechanisms by which similar overall reactions are achieved in functional analogs are also similar. We conclude that convergence of reaction is often accompanied by convergence of chemical mechanism. These results will be useful for classifying enzymes, guiding functional annotation of newly determined enzyme sequences and structures and for informing the engineering of enzymes with new functions.

Input:  Perceptual decisions are thought to be mediated by a mechanism of sequential sampling and integration of noisy evidence whose temporal weighting profile affects the decision quality. To examine temporal weighting, participants were presented with two brightness-fluctuating disks for 1, 2 or 3 seconds and were requested to choose the overall brighter disk at the end of each trial. By employing a signal-perturbation method, which deploys across trials a set of systematically controlled temporal dispersions of the same overall signal, we were able to quantify the participants’ temporal weighting profile. Results indicate that, for intervals of 1 or 2 sec, participants exhibit a primacy-bias. However, for longer stimuli (3-sec) the temporal weighting profile is non-monotonic, with concurrent primacy and recency, which is inconsistent with the predictions of previously suggested computational models of perceptual decision-making (drift-diffusion and Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes). We propose a novel, dynamic variant of the leaky-competing accumulator model as a potential account for this finding, and we discuss potential neural mechanisms.


Output:

An important process that supports decision-making is the integration of evidence over time, which optimizes decision quality by enhancing the signal to noise ratio. The nature of this process depends critically on the weight given to evidence across time: which information has more impact—early, intermediate or late? We used a novel psychophysical technique, which relies on differential temporal dispersion of evidence. This technique allowed us to extract the temporal weights people assign to the flow of evidence. We find that in decisions that are based on relatively short streams of evidence, people gave stronger weight to early information (primacy). Surprisingly, however, with longer streams of evidence, people assigned higher weights to early and late evidence, while underweighting intermediate evidence. This non-monotonic pattern of evidence integration is not predicted by the existing models of decision-making, posing a challenge to current theories. We propose a novel model that accounts for non-monotonic weighting, based on a change in leak and response-competition with integration-time, and we discuss potential neural mechanisms.
