CRISPR/CAS Genome Editing Technology: Implications And Challenges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scientists can use the Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)/CRISPR-associated (Cas) protein 9 system, which is a powerful and flexible tool for changing the genome, to change only certain parts of the genome. This has helped researchers figure out how target genes work in biology and disease. CRISPR/Cas9 is made up of a sequence-specific CRISPR RNA (crRNA) set and a generic Cas9 nuclease. The crRNA set tells Cas9 where to cut DNA and cause double-strand breaks. In the next step of cellular DNA repair, insertions, deletions, and swaps are made at specific spots. For CRISPR/Cas9-mediated DNA cleavage to be specific, the target sequences must match the crRNA, and a protospacer nearby motif must be placed after the target sequences. In this article, we talk about how CRISPR/Cas9 works at the molecular level, what it can be used for, what it can't do, and what its future clinical treatment promise might be.
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 | 0.015 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".