Portable digital video surveillance system for monitoring flower-visiting bumblebees
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study we used a portable event-triggered video surveillance system for monitoring flower-visiting bumblebees. The system consist of mini digital recorder (mini-DVR) with a video motion detection (VMD) sensor which detects changes in the image captured by the camera, the intruder triggers the recording immediately. The sensitivity and the detection area are adjustable, which may prevent unwanted recordings. To our best knowledge this is the first study using VMD sensor to monitor flower-visiting insects. Observation of flower-visiting insects has traditionally been monitored by direct observations, which is time demanding, or by continuous video monitoring, which demands a great effort in reviewing the material. A total of 98.5 monitoring hours were conducted. For the mini-DVR with VMD, a total of 35 min were spent reviewing the recordings to locate 75 pollinators, which means ca. 0.35 sec reviewing per monitoring hr. Most pollinators in the order Hymenoptera were identified to species or group level, some were only classified to family (Apidae) or genus (Bombus). The use of the video monitoring system described in the present paper could result in a more efficient data sampling and reveal new knowledge to pollination ecology (e.g. species identification and pollinating behaviour). download supplementary video
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it