Using ps3DDPDs, mutants were clustered based on overall similarities and differences in their dynamic behavior and residue composition across the set (Figure ). This way, the five wild type targets clustered together because they had the most stable trajectories overall, and CCR5 Y108A 3.32 was close by because overall it showed small differences to the wild type trajectory (Figure ). However, some discrepancies with the expected results based on RMSF differences were found. For example, ADRB2 S203A 5.43 and S204A 5.44 formed their own cluster despite showing differential RMSF peaks. This and other examples suggest that ps3DDPD values for this set of mutants were heavily influenced by fluctuations in the N-and C-terminus, which were the most accentuated. Therefore ps3DDPDs did capture mutant fluctuations, but using them in their optimized form for wild type GPCRs seemed suboptimal to discriminate mutants.