MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997227026 · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2019.100815

Catalytic Nucleic Acids: Biochemistry, Chemical Biology, Biosensors, and Nanotechnology

2020· review· en· W2997227026 on OpenAlexafffund
Lingzi Ma, Juewen Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueiScience · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDeoxyribozymeRibozymeNucleic acidRNADNALigase ribozymeNucleic acid structureComputational biologyNanotechnologyChemistryBiologyBiochemistryMaterials scienceGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the initial discovery of ribozymes in the early 1980s, catalytic nucleic acids have been used in different areas. Compared with protein enzymes, catalytic nucleic acids are programmable in structure, easy to modify, and more stable especially for DNA. We take a historic view to summarize a few main interdisciplinary areas of research on nucleic acid enzymes that may have broader impacts. Early efforts on ribozymes in the 1980s have broken the notion that all enzymes are proteins, supplying new evidence for the RNA world hypothesis. In 1994, the first catalytic DNA (DNAzyme) was reported. Since 2000, the biosensor applications of DNAzymes have emerged and DNAzymes are particularly useful for detecting metal ions, a challenging task for enzymes and antibodies. Combined with nanotechnology, DNAzymes are key building elements for switches allowing dynamic control of materials assembly. The search for new DNAzymes and ribozymes is facilitated by developments in DNA sequencing and computational algorithms, further broadening our fundamental understanding of their biochemistry.

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)0.001
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: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.005

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 head0.309
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations162
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueiScienceSame topicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniquesFrench-language works237,207