MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Selection in Evolving Chemical Mixtures

2024· preprint· en· W4394760294 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Pau Capera-Aragones, Kavita Matange, Vahab Rajaei, Loren Dean Williams, Moran Frenkel‐Pinter

Bibliographic record

VenueChemRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtein Structure and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAzrieli FoundationMinerva Foundation
KeywordsChemical speciesChemical reactionChemical evolutionChemical processChemical productsKinetic energySelection (genetic algorithm)Statistical physicsBiological systemComputer scienceChemical physicsChemistryBiochemical engineeringPhysicsBiologyArtificial intelligenceEngineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emergence of chemical selectivity presents one of the greatest challenges in the origins-of-life research. Complex or even relatively simple chemical mixtures undergoing chemical transformations tend to combinatorically explode. Large numbers of different chemical products arise because of the large number of ways by which mixtures of reactants can combine. Recent empirical work has shown that, under kinetic control conditions, combinatorial compression, i.e., a reduced numbers of species compared to those expected by combinatorics, can be observed. The mechanisms underlying combinatorial compression are yet to be elucidated. In this paper, we combine transition state theory with computer simulations to track the evolution of chemical species (i.e., changes in concentrations) under a wide range of parameter scenarios. Our study reveals that the experimentally observed combinatorial compression requires (i) chemical connectivity, (ii) kinetic dominance by an especially reactive ‘compressor’, and (iii) appropriate temperatures and reaction times. Our results shed new light on mechanisms of chemical evolution and can guide future experiments.

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)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemRxivSame topicProtein Structure and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207