Abiogenesis through gradual evolution of autocatalysis into template‐based replication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
How life emerged from inanimate matter is one of the most intriguing questions posed to modern science. Central to this research are experimental attempts to build systems capable of Darwinian evolution. RNA catalysts (ribozymes) are a promising avenue, in line with the RNA world hypothesis whereby RNA pre-dated DNA and proteins. Since evolution in living organisms relies on template-based replication, the identification of a ribozyme capable of replicating itself (an RNA self-replicase) has been a major objective. However, no self-replicase has been identified to date. Alternatively, autocatalytic systems involving multiple RNA species capable of ligation and recombination may enable self-reproduction. However, it remains unclear how evolution could emerge in autocatalytic systems. In this review, we examine how experimentally feasible RNA reactions catalysed by ribozymes could implement the evolutionary properties of variation, heredity and reproduction, and ultimately allow for Darwinian evolution. We propose a gradual path for the emergence of evolution, initially supported by autocatalytic systems leading to the later appearance of RNA replicases.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".