MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2411208702 · doi:10.1007/978-1-62703-980-2_2

Diversity and Evolution of Spliceosomal Systems

2014· article· en· W2411208702 on OpenAlexaff
Scott William Roy, Manuel Irimia

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in molecular biology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Research and Splicing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyEvolutionary biologyRNA splicingLineage (genetic)IntronAlternative splicingGenomeGeneticsContext (archaeology)GeneComputational biologyExonRNAPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The intron-exon structures of eukaryotic nuclear genomes exhibit tremendous diversity across different species. The availability of many genomes from diverse eukaryotic species now allows for the reconstruction of the evolutionary history of this diversity. Consideration of spliceosomal systems in comparative context reveals a surprising and very complex portrait: in contrast to many expectations, gene structures in early eukaryotic ancestors were highly complex and "animal or plant-like" in many of their spliceosomal structures has occurred; pronounced simplification of gene structures, splicing signals, and spliceosomal machinery occurring independently in many lineages. In addition, next-generation sequencing of transcripts has revealed that alternative splicing is more common across eukaryotes than previously thought. However, much alternative splicing in diverse eukaryotes appears to play a regulatory role: alternative splicing fulfilling the most famous role for alternative splicing-production of multiple different proteins from a single gene-appears to be much more common in animal species than in nearly any other lineage.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in molecular biologySame topicRNA Research and SplicingFrench-language works237,207