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
We hypothesize that forms of antagonistic coevolution have forged strong links between positive selection at the molecular level and increased cancer risk. By this hypothesis, evolutionary conflict between males and females, mothers and foetuses, hosts and parasites, and other parties with divergent fitness interests has led to rapid evolution of genetic systems involved in control over fertilization and cellular resources. The genes involved in such systems promote cancer risk as a secondary effect of their roles in antagonistic coevolution, which generates evolutionary disequilibrium and maladaptation. Evidence from two sources: (1) studies on specific genes, including SPANX cancer/testis antigen genes, several Y-linked genes, the pem homebox gene, centromeric histone genes, the breast cancer gene BRCA1, the angiogenesis gene ANG, cadherin genes, cytochrome P450 genes, and viral oncogenes; and (2) large-scale database studies of selection on different functional categories of genes, supports our hypothesis. These results have important implications for understanding the evolutionary underpinnings of cancer and the dynamics of antagonistically-coevolving molecular systems.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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