Canada's contributions to RNA research: past, present, and future perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The field of RNA research has provided profound insights into the basic mechanisms modulating the function and adaption of biological systems. RNA has also been at the center stage in the development of transformative biotechnological and medical applications, perhaps most notably was the advent of mRNA vaccines that were critical in helping humanity through the Covid-19 pandemic. Unbeknownst to many, Canada boasts a diverse community of RNA scientists, spanning multiple disciplines and locations, whose cutting-edge research has established a rich track record of contributions across various aspects of RNA science over many decades. Through this position paper, we seek to highlight key contributions made by Canadian investigators to the RNA field, via both thematic and historical viewpoints. We also discuss initiatives underway to organize and enhance the impact of the Canadian RNA research community, particularly focusing on the creation of the not-for-profit organization RNA Canada ARN. Considering the strategic importance of RNA research in biology and medicine, and its considerable potential to help address major challenges facing humanity, sustained support of this sector will be critical to help Canadian scientists play key roles in the ongoing RNA revolution and the many benefits this could bring about to Canada.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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.
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".