MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1651695586 · doi:10.1002/jez.b.22463

Next Gen Devo‐Evo

2012· article· en· W1651695586 on OpenAlex
Günter P. Wagner

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Zoology Part B Molecular and Developmental Evolution · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEvolutionary developmental biologyBiologyComparative biologyEvolutionary biologyBody planCognitive scienceData scienceGeneticsComputer scienceGenePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classical molecular DevoEvo originated, among other reasons, from the discovery of highly conserved developmental genes in distantly related organisms (Carroll et al., 2010). This was an important discovery, not the least because it allowed comparative developmental studies in non-model organisms and meaningful comparisons among species with little if any body plan similarities. Hence, the revolution of developmental genetics triggered a revolution in evolutionary biology leading to a bridge between long separated cousins, evolutionary and developmental biology. Now, we are faced with the fallout of another revolution in molecular biology, the simultaneous advent of next gen sequencing, synthetic and systems biology. It is already clear that the impact on the study of evolution of these advances will be as fundamental as the discovery of the homeobox was 30 years ago. This is what we call here “Next Gen Devo Evo,” a new phase of evolutionary discovery driven by the technological advances sweeping through present day biology creating new conceptual challenges for understanding the complexity of organismal evolution. When Frank Ruddle created the Molecular and Developmental Evolution section of the Journal of Experimental Zoology in 1999, the idea was to provide a platform for the publication of the then new field of evolutionary developmental biology. Now that we can see the coming of a new phase of mechanistically based evolutionary biology, it was decided to change the face and the editorial team of the journal to meet the anticipated change in the character of our science. With this issue the journal introduces a new team of associate editors with expertise reflecting the profile of Next Gen Devo Evo. Beside the core areas of DevoEvo, comparative vertebrate development (Kuratani, RIKEN Japan, Milinkovitch, University of Geneva), insect (Abouheif, McGill University), and other invertebrate developmental evolution (Wanninger, University of Vienna), as well as history and philosophy of biology (Brigandt, University of Alberta), we also now have editors who focus on computational systems biology (Teichmann, MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, Cambridge, UK), synthetic biology (Peisajovich, University of Toronto), and bioinformatics/biophysics (Milinkovitch, University of Geneva). Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution is dedicating its resources to foster and enhance a rigorous, mechanistic, and synthetic evolutionary biology, that is, to foster Next Gen Devo Evo.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it