MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4252944296 · doi:10.15173/sciential.v1i4.2241

Origins of Life

2020· article· en· W4252944296 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Hannah Mahoney

Bibliographic record

VenueSciential - McMaster Undergraduate Science Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicOrigins and Evolution of Life
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbiogenesisCompartmentalization (fire protection)RNA world hypothesisSubject (documents)ProtocellEpistemologyChemical evolutionModern lifeCognitive scienceEvolutionary biologyEarth scienceBiologyComputer scienceAstrobiologyPsychologyPhilosophyGeologyRNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When, where, and how did life on Earth originate? The origin of life problem involves multiple scientific disciplines and has spanned multiple decades. It can be summarized into three stages: (1) the origin of biological monomers, (2) the origin of biological polymers, and (3) the emergence and evolution of cells. While highly speculative, the connections between these stages are theorized by attempting to determine the geochemical situations which could have driven chemical evolution and allow for the emergence of specific chemical functions of biological systems. This review summarizes reported findings relevant to the early Earth environment and the main theories in the origin of life subject. Specific focus is placed on the metabolism first, RNA world, and compartmentalization first theories as they are involved in the origin of life paradox. The review then discusses submarine hydrothermal vents as a possible location for which life could have occurred. Understanding of information pertaining to the origin of life is important as it allows for advancement and discoveries in other fields of science and medicine. Overall, the aim of this review is to display the relevant information about the origin of life theory and highlight the importance of future research.

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)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.238 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSciential - McMaster Undergraduate Science JournalSame topicOrigins and Evolution of LifeFrench-language works237,207