The Resurrection Initiative: Storing Ancestral Genotypes to Capture Evolution in Action
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In rare circumstances, scientists have been able to revive dormant propagules from ancestral populations and rear them with their descendants to make inferences about evolutionary responses to environmental change. Although this is a powerful approach to directly assess microevolution, it has previously depended entirely upon fortuitous conditions to preserve ancestral material. We propose a coordinated effort to collect, preserve, and archive genetic materials today for future studies of evolutionary change—a “resurrection paradigm.” The availability of ancestral material that is systematically collected and intentionally stored using best practices will greatly expand our ability to illuminate microevolutionary patterns and processes and to predict ongoing responses of species to global change. In the workshop “Project Baseline,” evolutionary biologists and seed storage experts met to discuss establishing a coordinated effort to implement the resurrection paradigm.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it