MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408965998 · doi:10.1038/s42003-025-07962-8

Advancing archaeal research through FAIR resource and data sharing, and inclusive community building

2025· review· en· W4408965998 on OpenAlexaff
Solenne Ithurbide, Nicole R. Buan, Stefan Schulze

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications Biology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGeomagnetism and Paleomagnetism Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData sharingResource (disambiguation)SociologyEnvironmental resource managementData scienceComputer sciencePolitical scienceEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the last two decades archaeal research has expanded into a wide-ranging research field, driven by a fairly small research community. Archaea are now recognized as important players in the One-Health approach and expertise on the biology of archaea has become crucial in the study of a broad range of topics and environments, including the host-associated microbiomes, major nutrient cycles, greenhouse gas metabolism, the cell biology and origin of eukaryotes, adaptation of life to extremes, as well as various biotechnological applications. Here, we summarize existing resources and ongoing efforts in the engaged broader archaeal scientific community to accelerate research and resource sharing guided by FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable, reusable) data-sharing principles. We highlight ongoing community efforts that: (i) aim to share protocols and best practices for working with archaea (e.g. ARCHAEA.bio), (ii) combine large ‘omics datasets for the dissemination of unified, system-wide results (e.g. Archaeal Proteome Project, KBase) and (iii) provide opportunities for scientists to present their work in a supportive environment and to forge connections and collaborations (e.g. Archaea Power Hour). Together, these resources and projects promise to spur and cross-fertilize research, making archaeal research more accessible to a broader and more diverse audience. Archaeal research and its growing importance have benefited from a community that is engaged in various collaborative efforts, which are highlighted here with examples for the sharing of resources and data, as well as the building of supportive environments to advance the community.

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)0.121
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.173
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1210.173
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0100.009
Science and technology studies0.0090.013
Scholarly communication0.0220.036
Open science0.0090.083
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.175
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.312 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications BiologySame topicGeomagnetism and Paleomagnetism StudiesFrench-language works237,207