AI exposure: Geneticists

35.7% of this occupation's weighted task load is exposed, which puts Geneticists at the 62th percentile of 923 occupations. The capability is largely there. Its average task scores 2.3 out of 4 on what a current system can produce, and the frictions that hold other jobs in place are comparatively weak here.

What holds the line here is verification cost. Across this occupation's 24 tasks it averages 2.04 out of 3, the highest of the five friction dimensions. In plain terms, checking the output costs more than producing it. Where an undetected error is expensive, dangerous or irreversible, the economics change. Someone has to verify the work, and verifying can cost as much as doing it. This is the friction most likely to fall as tools for checking improve.

The most exposed thing this job does is Search scientific literature to select and modify methods and procedures most appropriate for..., at 80.0%. The least is Maintain laboratory safety programs and train personnel in laboratory safety techniques, at 10.0%. A gap of 70.0% between two parts of the same job is the reason this index publishes at task level. An occupation-wide number would have hidden both.

Within life, physical and social science occupations, this one is less exposed than the median of 36.3% across the group's 60 roles, with 31 scoring higher. Being in an exposed family does not make a particular job exposed, and the reverse holds too.

What would move this score. Of 24 tasks, 11 are currently banded exposed, 9 assisted and 4 untouched. For that distribution to shift materially would take cheaper ways to verify output, since the cost of checking is currently doing more to hold this work in place than the cost of producing it. The score is re-computed every quarter against a fresh capability reference, and the change is published rather than quietly applied.