MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3096560280 · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2020.101756

Thresholds in Origin of Life Scenarios

2020· review· en· W3096560280 on OpenAlexafffund
Cyrille Jeancolas, Christophe Malaterre, Philippe Nghe

Bibliographic record

VenueiScience · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicOrigins and Evolution of Life
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsAgence Nationale de la RechercheHuman Frontier Science Program
KeywordsAbiogenesisPrebioticAutocatalysisDarwinismCoupling (piping)Computer scienceStatistical physicsEvolutionary biologyBiochemical engineeringBiological systemBiologyPhysicsAstrobiologyMaterials scienceEngineeringGeneticsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thresholds are widespread in origin of life scenarios, from the emergence of chirality, to the appearance of vesicles, of autocatalysis, all the way up to Darwinian evolution. Here, we analyze the "error threshold," which poses a condition for sustaining polymer replication, and generalize the threshold approach to other properties of prebiotic systems. Thresholds provide theoretical predictions, prescribe experimental tests, and integrate interdisciplinary knowledge. The coupling between systems and their environment determines how thresholds can be crossed, leading to different categories of prebiotic transitions. Articulating multiple thresholds reveals evolutionary properties in prebiotic scenarios. Overall, thresholds indicate how to assess, revise, and compare origin of life scenarios.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations36
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueiScienceSame topicOrigins and Evolution of LifeFrench-language works237,207