Organic geochemical evidence for life in Archean rocks identified by pyrolysis–GC–MS and supervised machine learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Throughout Earth's history, organic molecules from both abiogenic and biogenic sources have been buried in sedimentary rocks. Most of these organic molecules have been significantly altered by geologic processes through deep time. Nonetheless, the nature and distribution of those ancient fragmentary organic remains have the potential to reveal diagnostic biomolecular information after billions of years of burial. Here, we analyzed 406 fossil, modern biological, meteoritic, and synthetic samples using pyrolysis gas chromatography and mass spectrometry. We explored these analytical data via supervised machine-learning methods to discriminate samples of biogenic vs. abiogenic origin, plant vs. animal phylogenetic affinity, and photosynthetic vs. nonphotosynthetic physiology. Dividing 272 samples with known phylogenetic affinity and physiology into 9 categories, each further divided into 75% training and 25% testing sets, our random forest models accurately predict pairwise assignments of modern vs. fossil or meteoritic organics (100% correct assignments), fossil plant tissues vs. meteoritic organics (97%), modern vs. fossil plant tissues (98%), and modern plants vs. animal tissues (95%). Pairwise comparisons between fossil biogenic samples vs. abiogenic samples resulted in 93% correct classifications, while analysis of modern and ancient photosynthetic vs. nonphotosynthetic samples also resulted in 93% correct assignments. Our analyses demonstrate that molecular biosignatures can survive in ancient fossils and allow for the identification of organismal origins and traits. Consistent with previous morphological and isotopic inferences, we present evidence for biogenic molecular assemblages in Paleoarchean rocks (3.33 Ga) and for photoautotrophy in Neoarchean rocks (2.52 Ga).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".