MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401053682 · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-63917-3_2

What Is Gene Editing?

2024· book-chapter· en· W4401053682 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa F. Clark, Jill E. Hobbs

Bibliographic record

VenueSpringerBriefs in environmental science · 2024
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputational biologyBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This chapter begins with the basics. We explain what gene editing is, and how different techniques are used to achieve genomic edits, including Site-Directed Nucleases, Meganucleases, Zinc Finger Nuclease, TALENs, and CRISPR-Cas9. The chapter maps out a timeline of the development of genome-editing techniques, discussing the benefits and challenges of each, with most recently CRISPR-Cas9. We provide examples of applications of gene editing in agrifood plant breeding. Despite the advantages of CRISPR-Cas9, other genome editing techniques may offer useful tools to address the challenges of agrifood production in the twenty-first century. Nevertheless, CRISPR-Cas9 technology remains the dominant approach to genome editing.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.535
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.243
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venueSpringerBriefs in environmental scienceSame topicCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringFrench-language works237,207