<i>Plant Physiology</i> Welcomes 26 New Assistant Features Editors
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
At the beginning of 2018, Plant Physiology initiated a program to introduce several promising early-career scientists to the editorial board and engage their expertise in assessing and writing about research published in the journal. Over the past 2 years, these scientists brought their passion for science to the journal, communicating to our readers each month some of the most exciting advances in research. The Assistant Features Editors have added substantially to the plant science community and to the journal. Their contributions have expanded our content through commentaries, blog posts, and related material highlighting content of special interest in Plant Physiology. They have gained professionally as well and will build on their experience with the journal. Eleven of this first cohort of Assistant Features Editors stepped down from the editorial board this past month, and we would like to take this opportunity to thank them all for their service. Twelve of this cohort will remain on the board this year. Indeed, the program has proven so successful that we are expanding its membership with 26 new Assistant Features Editors (listed below; pictures available at https://plantae.org/blog/2020-plant-phys-afes/) who join the Plant Physiology editorial board this month and will work alongside our seasoned crew. We, too, have learned much from working with the Assistant Features Editors these past 2 years. Among other changes, we have honed the way we support their work in writing commentaries and have streamlined their handling through the journal online submission system. Additionally, in response to feedback from the first cohort, we are developing ways of formalizing some aspects of their training and are building a mentoring program for the Assistant Features Editors over the next 2 years. So, welcome! We are thrilled to see both the new and returning Assistant Features Editors with us. We want, also, to add our special thanks to the ASPB and the ASPB Publications Committee for supporting this initiative. With these new members, we are pleased to note that the expanded board broadly reflects the topical distribution of research published in Plant Physiology. Sam Amsbury (University of Leeds, United Kingdom) Martin Balcerowicz (Sainsbury Laboratory, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom) Marcelo Campos (Federal University of Mato Grosso, Brazil) Guillaume Charrier (INRA Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes, France) Charles Copeland (Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research, Cologne, Germany) Mehran Dastmalchi (Brock University, Canada) Elisa Dell’Aglio (French Institute of Applied Research, Lyon, France), David Favero (RIKEN, Yokohama, Japan) Anne-Sophie Fiorucci (University of Lausanne, Switzerland) Kasper Gelderen (Utrecht University, The Netherlands) Sjon Hartman (Utrecht University, The Netherlands) Eva Hellman (Sainsbury Laboratory, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom) Kerri Hunter (University of Helsinki, Finland) Konstantions Koudounas (University of Tours, France) Javier Moreno (National University of Litoral-CONICET, Argentina) Ananya Mukherjee (University of Nebraska, United States) Lena Maria Müller (Boyce Thompson Institute, United States) Marc-Sven Roell (Heinrich-Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany) Madeleine Seale (University of Oxford, United Kingdom) Michael Skelly (University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom) Marc Somssich (University of Melbourne, Australia) Tianhu Sun (Cornell University, United States) Dhineshkumar Thiruppathi (Donald Danforth Plant Science Center, United States) Stefanie Wege (University of Adelaide, Australia) Sophia Zebell (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, United States) Wei Zhang (Kansas State University, United States) The new Assistant Features Editors are joining a subset of the first cohort, listed below, who have agreed to stay on for one more year to continue writing News and Views, help with the transition, and mentor the new Assistant Features Editors. Nathaniel Butler (University of Wisconsin, United States) Charlotte Gommers (Wageningen University, The Netherlands) Meisha Holloway-Phillips (University of Basel, Switzerland) Scott Hayes (CNB-CSIC, Madrid, Spain) Kim Johnson (La Trobe University, Australia) Magdalena Julkowska (KAUST, Saudi Arabia) Emily Larson (University of Bristol, United Kingdom) Amna Mhamdi (VIB Ghent, Belgium) Raimund Nagel (University of Leipzig, Germany) Lynn Richardson (Michigan State University, United States) Robert Skelton (South African Environmental Observation Network) Yunqing Yu (Donald Danforth Plant Science Center, United States)
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».