Translational remodeling by <scp>RNA</scp>‐binding proteins and noncoding <scp>RNAs</scp>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Responsible for generating the proteome that controls phenotype, translation is the ultimate convergence point for myriad upstream signals that influence gene expression. System-wide adaptive translational reprogramming has recently emerged as a pillar of cellular adaptation. As classic regulators of mRNA stability and translation efficiency, foundational studies established the concept of collaboration and competition between RNA-binding proteins (RBPs) and noncoding RNAs (ncRNAs) on individual mRNAs. Fresh conceptual innovations now highlight stress-activated, evolutionarily conserved RBP networks and ncRNAs that increase the translation efficiency of populations of transcripts encoding proteins that participate in a common cellular process. The discovery of post-transcriptional functions for long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs) was particularly intriguing given their cell-type-specificity and historical definition as nuclear-functioning epigenetic regulators. The convergence of RBPs, lncRNAs, and microRNAs on functionally related mRNAs to enable adaptive protein synthesis is a newer biological paradigm that highlights their role as "translatome (protein output) remodelers" and reinvigorates the paradigm of "RNA operons." Together, these concepts modernize our understanding of cellular stress adaptation and strategies for therapeutic development. This article is categorized under: RNA Interactions with Proteins and Other Molecules > Protein-RNA Interactions: Functional Implications Translation > Translation Regulation Regulatory RNAs/RNAi/Riboswitches > Regulatory RNAs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".